MUST 


THE 


OLD  TESTAMENT  GO? 


By  REV.  W.  F.  CRAFTS. 


BS480 

C88 


2.^'i  :oi 


Stom  f  ^e  &i6rari?  of 

QBequcat^eb  6)?  ^im  fo 
f^e  feiBrari?  of 

(()nnceton  S^eofogtcaf  ^eminarg 

,css 


MUST  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  GO? 


BY  REV.  W.  F.  CRAFTS. 


New  Testament  Helps.     .20. 

Teachers'  Edition  of  the  Revised  New  Testament,  with 

the  above  "Helps,"  marginal  notes,  etc.     J  1.50. 
Talks  to  Boys  and  Girls  about  Jesus.     .75. 
Heroes  and  Holidays.     Illustrated.     5i-25- 
Successful  Men  of  To-day.     Paper,  .25;  cloth,  .50. 
The  Bible  and  the  Sunday.School.     .10. 
Plain  Uses  of  the  Blackboard.    Paper,  .50;  cloth,  $1.25. 
Must  the  Old  Testament  Go?     Paper,  .20;   cloth,  .40. 

^*if  A  ny   volume    mailed  postpaid  on  receipt   of 
the  price. 

JAMES   H.   EARLE,   Boston,   Mass. 


Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 


OR, 


THE  RELATION  OF  THE   OLD   TESTAMENT 
TO    THE   CHRISTIAN  LIFE  OF  TO-DA  Y. 


By  rev.  WILBUR   F.  CRAFTS,  B.  D., 

AUTHOR   OF   "tHB   RESCUE   OF  CHILD-SOUL,"    "SUCCESSFUL  MEN  OP 
TO-DAY,"    "  HEROES   AND   HOLIDAYS,"   ETC. 


BOSTON: 

JAMES    H.    EARLE,    PUBLISHER, 

178  Washington  Street. 

1883. 


Copyright,  1883, 
By  W.  F.  Crafts. 


PREFACE. 


The  main  argument  of  this  volume  was  orig- 
inally read  as  a  paper  before  the  Erookl3'n 
Clerical  Union,  whose  distinguished  members 
generally  endorsed  the  positions  taken.  It  was 
subsequently  presented  as  a  thesis  to  the  Alpha 
Chapter  of  the  Alumni  of  the  Boston  University, 
by  whom  its  publication  was  requested.  Numer- 
ous and  important  additions  have  been  made  to 
the  original  manuscript  in  connection  with  the 
most  recent  controversies  about  the  Pentateuch. 

As  most  of  the  contributions  to  these  Old 
Testament  controversies  are  expressed  in  tech- 
nical terms,  understood  by  a  few  only,  there 
seems  to  be  room  for  a  statement  of  the  case 
in  the  language  of  the  people. 

Whatever  prejudices  may  be  destroyed,  all 
reverent    and    reasonable    investigations    of    the 


6  Miist  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

Bible  are  to  be  welcomed.  As  the  controversy 
that  culminated  in  the  Nicene  Creed  practically 
settled  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  deity ;  and  as 
the  Reformation  crystalized  the  doctrine  of  jus- 
tification; so  in  our  day,  perhaps,  the  doctrine 
of  inspiration  is  to  have  its  crucial  investiga- 
tion and  more  accurate  statement,  and  then 
remain   forever  settled   in   the   Church. 

W.  F.  C. 

Brooklyn,  May,  1883. 


CONTENTS. 


I.     Is   any   Scripture    inspired  wliich    does   not 

inspire  me  ? 9 

II.     Is    there     any    Scripture     which     does    not 

inspire   some   minds  .'' 22 

III.  How  fared  the  Old  Testament  when  tested 

by   Christ's   Peason  .'' 27 

IV.  Did   Christ's   Moral    Sense    Reject   the    Old 

Testament    Histories   as   Incredible  ?  .     .         36 

V.     Did   Ezra   deceive   Christ  .'' 45 

VI.     Will  the  New  Theories  about  the  Old  Tes- 
tament  Bear   the   Tests   of   Logic  ?     .     .         59 
VII.     Did   Christ  abrogate  Old  Testament  Laws  ?        76 
VIII.     What  was  the  teaching  of  Christ  in  regard 
to    Old    Testament    prophecies    and  im- 
precatory  Psalms  ? 82 

IX.    Are    God's    tenderness   and    Man's    immor- 
tality  revealed  in   the    Old   Testament  ?        92 


MUST  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  GO  ? 


I. 


Is  Any  Scripture  Inspired  which   does   not 
Inspire   Me  ? 

The  most  subtle  line  of  criticism  directed 
against  the  present  use  of  the  Old  Testament 
for  moral  and  spiritual  culture,  and  one  found 
not  on]^  outside  of  the  evangelical  church, 
but  also  inside  of  it,  is  represented  by  the 
following  quotations  :  "  The  test  of  an  in- 
spired word  is  that  it  inspires,  not  that  it 
happens  to  be  found  between  Genesis  and 
Revelation.  We  save  all  the  Bible,  not  be- 
cause we  believe  all,  but  because  we  value  it 
as  ancient  literature.  I  regard  those  parts 
only  as  inspired  which  inspire  me.  The 
helping  word  is  the  divine  word."^  "We  are 
to  consider  as  inspired  only  those  portions  of 


lO  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

the  Old  Testament  which  are  not  revolting 
to  the  most  cultured  modern  mind."  -  "  If 
anything  in  them  does  not  approve  itself  to 
the  reason  and  moral  sense  as  true,  it  is  to  be 
rejected."  ^  "  More  depends  on  the  credibility 
of  the  history  and  legislation  of  the  Penta- 
teuch, than  how  much  of  it  was  written 
by  Moses." ^  "The  plain,  central,  heart-felt 
truths  of  the  Bible  that  speak  for  them- 
selves and  rest  on  their  own  indefeasible 
worth  will  assuredly  remain  to  us."^ 

Some  claim  to  find  scriptural  authority  for 
this  theory  of  Biblical  Criticism  in  2  Tim.  3  : 
16,  as  rendered  in  the  Revised  Version  : 
"  Every  scripture  inspired  of  God  is  also 
profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  cor- 
rection, for  instruction  which  is  in  righteous- 
ness." It  would  be  logical  to  deduce  from 
this  statement  the  conclusion  that  no  writ- 
ings that  are  not  "profitable"  in  some  de- 
gree and  under  some  circumstances  could 
possibly  be  God-inspired ;  but  it  is  certainly 
neither  translation  nor  logic  to  deduce  from 
this  passage  the  rule  :  "  No  scripture  which 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  II 

does  not  seem  profitable  to  vie  is  given  by 
inspiration  of  God,  and  only  the  scripture 
which  inspires  me  is  God-inspired."  This 
egoism'  in  Bible  interpretation  transforms 
the  Divine  Message  into  a  bill  of  fare  from 
which  you  take  what  you  please,  or  what 
pleases  you. 

The  word  "  Scripture,"  in  Paul's  statement, 
is  one  which  in  New  Testament  usage  does 
not  refer  to  writings  in  general,  any  more 
than  "  Bible  "  in  common  usage  to-day  means 
book,  but  only  to  those  Bible  manuscripts 
which  were  then  received  as  The  Word  of 
God.  Whatever  of  the  New  Testament, 
"Scripture,"  as  he  used  it,  did  or  did  not 
include,  it  referred  at  least  to  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, which  the  Jews  had  in  its  present 
collected  form  in  the  Greek  Septuagint  trans- 
lation from  288  B.  C.,  and  in  their  Hebrew 
Bible  much  earlier  still.  Even  Prof.  Rob- 
ertson Smith  admits  that  the  books  of  the 
Old  Testament  were  all  accepted  as  canonical 
by  the  Jewish  church  before  the  time  of 
Christ,  except  Esther,  Canticles,  and  Eccle- 


1 2  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  f 

siastes,  whose  canonicity  he  shows  was  ques- 
tioned, but  not  that  their  endorsement  was 
insufficient.  It  is  like  the  case  of  Luther 
condemning  the  epistle  of  James,  while  the 
church  accepted  it. 

It  is  evident  that  Paul  means  to  say  to 
Timothy,  "Every  part  of  your  Bible  is  God- 
inspired  and  therefore  profitable  for  convic- 
tion, or  for  conversion,  or  for  Christian 
culture."®  Surely  this  passage  cannot  be 
made  to  bulwark  the  theory,  that  Scripture 
is  to  be  accepted  or  rejected  by  the  ther- 
mometer of  a  single  individual's  moral  sense 
and  "intuitions."'^  Many,  if  not  all,  of  those 
who  hold  this  theory  do  not  feel  that  any 
Bible  warrant  for  their  test  of  inspiration 
is  necessary. 

But  if  this  theory  of  criticism  is  true, 
without  regard  to  proof-texts,  and  if  we  are 
to  consider  as  inspired  only  those  portions 
of  the  Old  Testament  that  approve  them- 
selves to  the  reason  and  moral  sense  of  the 
clearest  and  strongest  minds,  of  what  prac- 
tical   value    is    the    test,    since    it    can    be 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  13 

perfectly  applied  only  by  one  whose  moral 
and  logical  senses  are  perfect,  not  dimmed 
by  the  least  prejudice  or  by  any  defect 
of  moral  perception.  A  strong  prejudice 
against  the  supernatural  or  in  favor  of 
evolutionary  theories*  would  vitiate  the 
application  of  this  test,  just  as  a  thermome- 
ter plunged  in  warm  water  would  not  cor- 
rectly indicate  the  weather.  When  a  man 
comes  to  his  Bible  believing  in  advance  of 
investigation  that  evolution  must  be  the  rule 
of  all  spiritual  as  weH  as  of  all  physical 
life,  saying,  "Christianity  must  fit  into  this 
universal  order,"®  he  has  put  green  glasses^ 
on  the  eyes  of  his  reason  and  moral  sense, 
and  will  see  everywhere  not  truth-trends 
but  proof-texts  of  religious  Darwinism,  as 
surely  as  the  Calvinist,  whom  he  condemns 
for  his  method  of  Bible  study,  sees  every- 
where proof-texts  of  foreordination  through 
his  blue  glasses. 

Both  critics  and  Christians  are  to  come 
to  the  Bible  as  unbiased  as  a  little  child,  and 
study  its  truths  instead  of  seeking  props  to 


14  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ^ 

their  prejudices.  If  every  man  is  to  be 
allowed  to  cut  out  of  his  Bible  as  ^'tmin- 
spired''  whatever  does  not  ''ijispire"  him, 
because  it  collides  with  his  prejudices,  the 
work  of  destructive  criticism  will  be  greatly 
"expedited." 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  how  does  such  a 
test  work.?  Take  two  men  of  equal  mental 
power  and  education  and  moral  culture, 
and  to  the  moral  and  logical  senses  of  one 
it  seems  more  reasonable  to  believe  that 
chance  evolved  the  first  woman  from  a 
polliwig,  than  to  believe  that  an  Almighty 
God  created  her  from  Adam's  side.  To 
the  moral  and  logical  senses  of  the  other, 
the  reverse  is  far  more  reasonable.  The 
moral  and  logical  senses  of  one  man  repu- 
diate the  story,  declared  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  confirmed  in  the  New,^°  that  God 
commanded  Abraham  to  offer  Isaac  as  a 
sacrifice,  intending  to  stay  proceedings  after 
Abraham  had  been  tested,  and  before  any 
fatal  result  had  been  reached.  The  moral 
and   logical   senses   of   another   find   no  rea- 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  1 5 

son  to  call  this  ungodlike  and  imkingly 
while  applauding  as  wise  (as  all  have  done, 
even  in  Pompeii,  where  a  picture  of  the 
scene  has  recently  been  discovered)  the 
precisely  similar  act  of  Solomon,  who,  to 
test  two  women,  each  of  whom  claimed  a 
certain  child  as  her  own,  ordered  the  child 
to  be  cut  in  two,  no  more  intending  to  have 
it  done  than  God  expected  to  have  Isaac 
slain,  but  proposing  simply  to  reveal  and 
develop  the  true  and  false  in  the  characters 
before  him. 

One  man's  moral  and  logical  senses  are 
shocked  by  the  story  of  Balaam's  ass  speak- 
ing ;  another  finds  no  inconsistency  in  the 
statement,  that  the  God  who  has  created 
parrots  with  the  power  of  speech,  has  caused 
other  creatures  of  the  animal  kingdom  to 
speak  when  some  moral  or  spiritual  emer- 
gency called  for  such  a  miracle.  The  moral 
and  logical  senses  of  many  people  reject  as 
untrue  the  story  of  Jonah.  Christ  thrice 
quoted  it  as  true  history,  with  no  shock  to 
\J[is  moral  and  lofrical  senses." 


1 6  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

It  is  dogmatically  said  by  Colenso  and 
Robertson  Smith  that  Christ  quoted  this 
and  other  Old  Testament  stories  as  legend, 
not  as  history/^  But  what  speaker  does  not 
know  that  if  he  should  take  a  legend  from 
the  Arabian  Nights  to  illustrate  the  resur- 
rection of  Christ,  and  say,  "As  surely  as 
Sindbad  was  lifted  from  the  valley  into  the 
air  by  the  gigantic  bird,  Christ  rose  from 
the  dead  by  His  own  power,"  the  resurrec- 
tion itself  would  be  weakened  rather  than 
strengthened  by  the  illustration,  and  the 
suggestion  would  at  once  occur  that  both 
were  alike  untrue.  When  an  ignorant  ora- 
tor declared  that  something  he  had  stated 
was  as  "certain  as  that  Romeo  founded 
Rome,"  a  decided  suspicion  was  thrown 
over  the  original  statement.  If  Christ, 
in  His  numerous  quotations  of  the  Old 
Testament  histories,  knew  that  they  were 
legends  while  He  constantly  referred  to 
them  as  facts,  or  if  they  were  legends 
and  He  mistook  them  for  truths,  we  must 
ogically   infer   that    in    His    statements    as 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  ly 

to  morals  and  religion,   also,  He  was  liable 
to  error. 

The  Bible  is  so  wonderfully  interwoven 
that  the  denial  of  the  Old  Testament  his- 
tories logically  leads  to  the  rejection  of 
Christ's  authority,  while  the  acceptance  of 
Christ's  authority  logically  compels  the  ac- 
ceptance, also,  of  the  truthfulness  of  the 
Old  Testament. 

Why  should  it  seem  to  any  one  impos- 
sible that  the  God  who  could  continue  the 
life  of  Jonah  for  months  in  the  body  of  his 
mother,  could  preserve  his  life  for  a  few 
hours  in  the  stomach  of  a  great  fish  .'*  This 
is  but  one  of  many  cases  where  a  Bible 
miracle  is  scoffed  at  as  impossible,  althougihr 
paralleled  every  day  by  similar  and  greater 
miracles  in  the  ordinary  processes  of  na- 
ture. For  instance,  the  resurrection,  of 
which  Jonah's  story  was  made  the  illustra- 
tion, — 

"  The  miracle  is  not  so  great 
Of  ours,  as  is  the  rising  of  the  wheat." 

Indeed  in   that  very  book  of  Jonah  there 


1 8  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

are  two  greater  miracles  than  the  one  so 
much  disbelieved  :  the  repentance  and  con- 
version of  all  the  inhabitants  of  Nineveh, 
a  city  as  large  as  Philadelphia, —  an  event 
unparalleled  in  any  modern  evangelism ;  and 
the  very  existence  of  "a  foreign  missionary 
book  in  the  midst  of  the  Old  Testament."  ^^ 

To  the  mxOral  and  logical  senses  of  a  once 
famous  Boston  preacher  many  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament lessons  selected  for  Sunday-school 
study  during  the  last  eight  years  seemed 
profitless  and  uninspiring,  so  much  so  that 
by  voice  and  pen  he  condemned  them  as 
having  no  value  in  the  present  age.-'*  But 
to  the  moral  and  logical  senses  of  Dr.  John 
Hall,  Dr.  Wm.  M.  Taylor,  Dr.  J.  H.  Vincent, 
and  scores  of  other  lesson-writers  whom  the 
world  has  delighted  to  honor,  those  same 
lessons  were  found  to  be  full  of  things  in- 
spiring to  noble  life,  and  "profitable  for 
doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  in- 
struction in  righteousness." 

The  impracticability  of  the  personal  test, 
that  scripture    is   only  to  be  considered  in- 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  19 

spired  if  it  inspires  ine,  is  fully  proved, 
then,  from  the  fact  that  persons  of  equal 
intellectual  and  spiritual  culture  obtain  ex- 
actly opposite  results  by  this  variable  ther- 
mometer. 

Indeed,  the  same  difference  appears  be- 
tween the  impressions  of  Scripture  which  a 
man  has  at  one  time  and  those  of  the  same 
man  at  another  time,  in  another  mood  or 
in  another  experience,  or  especially  when  he 
has  another  purpose  to  accomplish  in  prac- 
tical Christian  work.  The  passages  that 
seemed  profitless  in  prosperity  commend 
themselves  to  him  as  rich  and  profitable  in 
adversity.  Those  that  have  little  interest  in 
youth  become  mines  of  wealth  in  age. 
Those  that  may  seem  untrue  at  one  period 
of  life,  will  have  been  approved  by  later 
experiences. 

This  test  of  Scripture,  then,  applied  from 
a  personal  standpoint,  is  valueless  because 
of  the  differences  in  men  and  the  defects 
in  the  moral  and  logical  faculties  of  every 
one    who    uses    it.     That    man    must    be    a 


20  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  f 

supreme  egotist  who  supposes  that  the  com- 
pass of  his  moral  sense  and  reason  will  in- 
fallibly detect  all  that  is  inspired  in  the 
Bible,  and  reject  only  what  is  uninspired. 

Suppose    we    should    apply    this    test    of 
individual  reason  and  moral  sense  to  human 

laws. 

"  No  rogue  e'er  felt  the  halter  draw, 
With  good  opinion  of  the  law." 

So  in  varying  degrees,  even  in  cultured 
society,  each  one's  favorite  sin  or  previous 
prejudices  warp  his  opinion.  There  is 
hardly  a  law  in  our  statute  books  that  is 
not  opposed  by  some  cultured  mind.  Are 
there  not  persons  of  education  who  tell  us 
that  their  moral  sense  condemns  laws  relat- 
ing to  prohibition  .-•  Others  say  that  their 
moral  sense  vetoes  suffrage,  or  marriage,  or 
.capital  punishment,  or  private  ownership  of 
property.  In  the  universities  of  Russia 
there  are  men  of  education  who  think  that 
common  sense  and  moral  sense  condemn  all 
government,  all  society,  all  rights  of  prop- 
erty, and  approve  as  right  nothing  less  than 


Personal  Test  of  Inspiration.  21 


Nihilism,  —  communism  in  love  and  land. 
Oliver  Wendell  Holmes  reminds  us  that 
"as  iron  is  almost  never  found  in  the  earth 
pure,  but  usually  in  some  combination,  as 
the  sulphuret  of  iron,  the  oxide  of  iron,  etc., 
so  truth  is  seldom  found  pure  in  human 
minds,  but  rather  as  the  Jonesate  of  truth, 
and  the  Brownite  of  truth." 

The  test  of  inspiration  by  a  man's  moral 
sense  is  therefore  unreliable,  because  that 
moral  sense  is  usually  found  in  some  com- 
bination with  selfishness  or  prejudice. 


22  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


II. 


Is   THERE   ANY    PART    OF     SCRIPTURE    WHICH    HAS 
NOT   INSPIRED   SOME   MINDS? 

The  test  of  Scripture  by  its  profitable- 
ness and  power  to  inspire  men  might  be 
appropriately  applied  by  asking,  "  Is  there 
any  part  of  the  Old  Testament  that  does 
not  approve  itself  to  the  moral  and  logical 
senses  of  some  noble  and  cultured  minds  as 
true,  reasonable,  and  profitable  ? "  In  an- 
swer we  could  quote  from  the  most  promi- 
nent thinkers  of  the  last  two  centuries, 
passages  to  show  that  every  part  of  the 
Old  Testament  has  proved  itself  inspired 
by  inspiring  "  these  most  cultured  modern 
minds." 

Dr.  Bellows,  the  distinguished  Unitarian, 
said,  "  Nothing  can  ever  change  or  destroy 
the  sublime   merits    and    religious    influence 


Tested  by   Universal  Conseionsness.       23 

of  the  Mosaic  Dispensation."  Miss  Sarah 
Smiley,  a  speaker  and  writer  of  the  utmost 
intellectual  and  spiritual  refinement,  finds 
profitable  and  helpful  lessons  even  in  the 
Bible's  lists  of  names,  as  reminders  that 
God  thinks  of  us,  not  in  masses,  as  public 
orators  do,  but  as  individuals,  "calling  His 
own  sheep  by  name."  Indeed,  there  is  at 
least  one  record  of  a  conversion  in  con- 
nection with  one  of  these  lists,  —  that  of 
the  5th  chapter  of  Genesis, — where  the 
oft -repeated  expression,  "And  he  died," 
after  each  name,  reminded  a  man  who 
heard  this  chapter  read,  of  the  certainty  of 
his  own  death,  and  thus  led  him  to  a 
religious  life.  Guizot,  one  of  the  greatest 
statesmen  of  France,  declared  his  firm  be- 
lief in  the  history  of  the  Old  Testament 
as  well  as  the  evangelical  Christianity  of 
the  New.  Gibbon  declares  Job  to  be  "a 
sublimer  book  than  anything  in  the  Koran," 
and  Carlyle  pronounces  it  "the  sublimest 
poem  of  all  ages."  Locke,  the  philosopher, 
"died     to     the     delicious     music"    of     the 


24  Micst  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

Psalms,  read  by  his  bedside  at  his  own 
request.  Humboldt  eulogizes  the  104th 
Psalm  as  "a  concise  and  complete  descrip- 
tion of  the  whole  cosmos, — a  psalm  of  the 
world."  John  Milton  wrote,  "There  are  no 
songs  to  be  compared  to  the  songs  of 
Zion ;  no  orations  equal  to  those  of  the 
prophets;  no  politics  like  those  the  Scrip- 
tures teach.  I  shall  wish  I  may  deserve 
to  be  reckoned  among  those  who  admire 
and  dwell  upon  them."  Spurgeon  has  said 
that  he  has  little  confidence  in  that  man's 
piety  who  thinks  lightly  of  Solomon's  Song. 
Dr.  Strong,  one  of  the  Bible  revision  com- 
mittee, who  is  recognized  as  a  leading 
scholar,  while  accounting  this  statement  of 
Mr.  Spurgeon  "harsh,"  declares  that  he 
finds  nothing  offensive  to  his  moral  sense 
in  Solomon's  Song,  but  that  on  the  other 
hand  it  approves  itself  to  his  spiritual 
taste.  A  devout  rabbi  once  called  it 
"The  Scripture's  Holy  of  Holies."  Mat- 
thew Arnold  has  edited  the  second  part 
of   Isaiah  as  a  text-book   for  the  culture  of 


Tested  by  Universal  Consciousness.       25 

the  imagination  in  English  schools.  Even 
Weiss,  the  free-religionist,  exclaims,  "  The 
prophecies  of  Isaiah  and  Jeremiah  can  be 
matched  by  no  other  literature  in  the 
world."  Sir  Isaac  Newton  devoted  his 
kingly  intellect  to  a  careful  preparation  of 
a  book  on  Daniel.  Franklin,  although  an 
infidel  in  early  life,  was  won  to  admiration 
of  the  Old  Testament  by  reading  it,  and 
pronounced  the  prayer  of  Habakkuk  one  of 
the  sublimest  passages  in  all  literature. 

Such  references  from  "the  most  cultured 
modern  minds"  might  be  given  if  neces- 
sary in  connection  with  almost  every  page 
of  the  Old  Testament,  —  even  those  most 
offensive  to  some  critics. 

The  writer  has  the  custom  of  marking 
in  his  Bible  with  a  red  cross  every  text 
which  he  knows  to  have  been  the  means 
of  converting  a  soul.  There  is  such  a  red 
cross  in  that  first  verse  of  Genesis,  "  In 
the  beginning  God  created,"  which  would 
not  at  first  thought  seem  to  be  spiritually 
profitable,  but  led  a  Japanese   student,  who 


26  Must  the  Old   Testament  Go  ? 

read  it  in  a  Chinese  Bible,  to  read  further, 
and  thus  made  him  a  Christian.  There  is 
also  a  red  cross  in  the  second  command- 
ment, "Thou  shalt  not  make  unto  thee  any 
graven  image,"  which  caused  the  conver- 
sion of  a  Roman  Catholic.  In  the  story  of 
David  fighting  with  Goliath,  there  is  another 
red  cross,  for  that  story,  read  in  a  street 
meeting  by  a  lay  preacher  of  England,  led  to 
the  conversion  of  a  notorious  prize-fighter, 
Bendigo,  whose  attention  was  attracted  by 
the  "set-to,"  as  he  called  it,  and  listening 
attentively  for  the  result,  he  learned  spiritual 
lessons  which  soon  led  him  to  a  Christian 
life. 

If  one  knew  Christian  history  as  the 
angels  know  it,  he  could  doubtless  put 
such  a  red  cross  mark  into  every  chapter 
of  the  Old  Testament.  The  test  of  the 
Bible's  inspiration  by  its  power  to  inspire 
would  thus  confirm  every  part  of  the 
Scriptures,  if  broadly  applied  by  universal 
Christian  consciousness  rather  than  by  in- 
dividual sentiment. 


Tested  by  Christ's  Reason.  2/ 


III. 


How   FARED   THE  OlD  TESTAMENT  WHEN   TESTED 

BY  Christ's  Reason  ? 

The  world  has  seen  but  one  person  who 
could  properly  make  the  application  a  per- 
sonal one,  and  whose  reason  and  moral 
sense  would  infallibly  reject  that  which  was 
uninspired  and  accept  that  which  was  God- 
inspired.  The  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  by  uni- 
versal consent,  is  the  only  one  that  "e'er 
wore  earth  about  him"  whose  intellectual 
and  spiritual  powers  were  absolutely  un- 
dimmed  by  any  prejudice.  To  both  skeptics 
and  Christians  He  is  "The  purest  among 
the  mighty,  and  the  mightiest  among  the 
pure."^^  Let  us  then  ask  how  the  Old 
Testament  fared  when  tested  in  its  history 
and  precepts  by  His  perfect  moral  sense. 
What  was  the  attitude  which  Christ  took 
toward  the  Old  Testament,  which  has  been 


28  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

fitly  called  "the  Saviour's  Bible,"  since  He 
had  it  in  substantially  the  same  form  in 
which  we  have  it  ? 

The  use  which  Jesus  made  of  the  Old 
Testament  will  show  its  bearing  upon  the 
Christian  life  of  to-day.  To  the  true 
Christian  the  clear  testimony  of  Christ 
"concludes  debate."  He  is  "the  Amen, 
the   faithful   and   true   Witness." 

Observe,  then,  that  Christ  did  not  ^^  treat 
the  Bible  like  any  other  book.''  As  Dr.  H. 
M.  Dexter  has  said,  "  No  critical  exami- 
nation of  it  could  be  more  utterly  unrea- 
sonable and  untrustworthy  than  that  which 
should  disregard  the  most  patent  fact  con- 
cerning it,  —  that  it  is  not  like  any  other 
volume  known  to  men."  To  Him  it  was 
not  a  dead  body  for  a  critical  dissecting 
table,  but  a  "living"  messenger  from  the 
Most  High,  bringing  tidings  and  commands 
to  men.  He  condemned  the  mistake  of 
those  who  "  searched "  only  its  surface, 
who  counted  its  letters,  but  failed  to  secure 
the  life  it  offered. 


Tested  by  Christ's  Reason.  29 

Christ's  familiarity  with  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  shown  by  quotations  from  nearly  all 
of  its  books  in  His  recorded  addresses  and 
conversations.  If  we  had  His  unpublished 
discourses  also,  we  should  doubtless  have 
quotations  from  every  Old  Testament  book. 
As  it  is,  we  have  them  from  Genesis, 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deuteronomy, 
Samuel,  Kings,  Chronicles,  Psalms,  Prov- 
erbs, Solomon's  Song,^®  Isaiah,  Jeremiah, 
Ezekiel,  Daniel,  Jonah,  Micah,  Joel,  Zech- 
ariah,  Malachi." 

Those  Bible  critics  who  assail  almost 
every  part  of  the  Bible,  unanimously  leave 
the  sermon  on  the  mount  unmangled  as 
the  unquestioned  utterance  of  Jesus  Christ. 
Within  the  Christian  church  even  those 
who  ignore  or  reject  the  Old  Testament 
usually  agree  with  the  sentiment  of  Daniel 
Webster  in  regard  to  this  discourse,  "The 
sermon  on  the  mount  cannot  be  a  merely 
human  production."  And  what  parts  of  the 
sermon  on  the  mount  are  reckoned  of  high- 
est value  and  inspiration  ?     It  would  usually 


30  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

be  answered,  the  Beatitudes,  the  Lord's 
Prayer,  the  Golden  Rule,  the  command  to 
love  all  men  as  our  neighbors,  the  exhor- 
tation to  love  our  enemies,  the  comments 
on  the  commandments  as  kept  or  violated 
by  the  state  of  the  heart,  the  reference  to 
fasts  to  be  kept  in  spirit  and  not  merely 
in  form,  and  the  declaration  of  God's  care 
for  ravens  and  other  creatures  of  nature. 
These  are  the  elements  in  the  sermon  on 
the  mount  which  have  won  the  eulogy  even 
of  those  who  condemn  the  Old  Testament. 
But  every  one  of  these  is  either  a  quota- 
tion or  paraphrase  of  the  Old  Testament, 
with  which  Christ's  spirit  was  so  saturated 
and  His  memory  so  filled  that  its  principles 
in  new  forms  and  fuller  utterance  make  up 
His  inauguration  discourse. 

Every  one  of  the  Beatitudes  is  a  quota- 
tion either  of  the  letter  or  spirit  of  some 
Old  Testament  passage.  It  is  in  Psalms 
37:2,  that  it  is  declared  first  that  "the 
meek  shall  inherit  the  earth."  It  is  in 
Psalms  24  :  3,  4,  that  we  are  first   reminded 


Tested  by  Christ's  Reason.  31 

of  the  blessedness  of  those  who  have  clean 
hands  and  a  pure  heart.  It  is  in  Isaiah 
61  :  3  that  the  blessedness  of  those  that 
mourn  is  first  declared;  and  there  are  three 
passages  in  Isaiah  and  the  Psalms  that  tell 
us  of  the  blessedness  of  the  poor  in  spirit, 
in  whose  contrite  hearts  God  dwells.'^^  The 
blessedness  of  those  that  hunger  and  thirst 
after  righteousness/^  of  the  merciful,-"  and 
of  the  peace-makers/^  are  also  declared  re- 
peatedly in  the  Old  Testament.  The  Lord's 
Prayer  is  really  a  paraphrase  of  Chron.  29  : 
10-13:  "Blessed  be  Thou,  Lord  God  of 
Israel,  our  Father  forever  and  ever.  Now, 
therefore,  our  God,  we  thank  Thee  and 
praise  Thy  glorious  name.  Thine,  O  Lord, 
is  the  greatness  and  the  power  and  the 
glory  and  the  victory  and  the  majesy;  for 
all  that  is  in  the  heavens  and  in  the  earth 
is  Thine.  Thine  is  the  kingdom,  O  Lord, 
and  Thou  art  exalted  as  head  above  all," 
etc.  The  command,  "  Love  thy  neighbor 
as  thyself,"  often  spoken  of  as  "a  New 
Testament   commandment,"    is    only   a   quo- 


32  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

tation  from  Lev.  19:  18;  and  the  exhorta- 
tion to  "  love  our  enemies "  was  given  at 
least  thrice  in  the  Old  Testament, —  Christ's 
words  being  a  free  quotation  from  one  of 
them.^^  As  to  the  Golden  Rule,  Jesus 
Himself  said  that  He  learned  it  from  the 
Law   and   the    Prophets. '^^ 

It  is  sometimes  intimated,  that  Christ 
introduced  an  entirely  new  element  into 
the  Decalogue  when  He  said,  **  He  that 
hateth  his  brother  is  a  murderer,"  and 
"He  that  looketh  on  a  woman  to  lust  after 
her,  hath  committed  adultery  with  her  al- 
ready in  his  heart."  ^*  But  instead  of  in- 
troducing a  new  principle  Christ  was  simply 
turning  on  these  commands  the  light  of 
the  tenth  commandment,  as  Paul  intimates 
in  Romans  T  :  T  '■  "I  had  not  known  lust 
except  the  law  had  said,  thou  shalt  not 
covet";  and  it  was  Moses  who  first  de- 
clared that  love  to  God  and  love  to  man 
was  the  essence  of  the  Law,  that  is,  that 
one  would  keep  the  commandments  accord- 
ing to  the  condition  of  his  heart. 


Tested  by  Christ's  Reason.  33 

Christ's  suggestions  about  fasting, ^^  and 
His  tender  references  to  the  ravens  and 
sparrows,^®  were  learned  from  His  Old  Tes- 
tament. Did  Christ  say,  "Seek  ye  first  the 
kingdom  of  God  and  His  righteousness"? 
He  found  the  thought  in  Psalms   35  :  10. 

What  Mr.  Beecher  has  said  of  the  Be- 
atitudes might  be  said  of  the  whole  ser- 
mon on  the  mount, — that  its  sentiments  are 
Old  Testament  bells,  which  Christ  grouped 
into  a  chime.  If  "the  sermon  on  the  mount 
cannot  be  a  merely  human  production,"  what 
shall  we  say  of  the  Old  Testament  chapters 
from  which  its   sentiments  were  taken  } 

A  similar  fact  will  appear  by  examining 
the  other  discourses  of  Christ,  so  much 
eulogized  by  those  who  depreciate  the  Old 
Testament.  Christ,  in  the  15th  chapter  of 
John,  gives  us  a  wondrous  discourse  on 
Christians  as  the  branches  of  the  true  Vine ; 
but  this  is  only  the  fuller  development  of 
an  Old  Testament  parable,  —  Christ  as  a 
spiritual  preacher  amplifying  and  develop- 
ing an  Old  Testament  text.^' 


34  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


So  the  conception  of  God  as  a  Good 
Shepherd  and  the  church  as  His  flock  is 
not  found  first  in  the  Gospel  of  John,-*  but 
in  Moses/®  and  David,^°  and  Isaiah. ^^  Some 
of  the  most  beautiful  conversations  and  dis- 
courses of  Christ  present  Him  as  the 
Bridegroom  and  the  church  as  His  bride ; 
but  all  His  parables  on  this  subject  are  but 
the  flowering  out  of  Old  Testament  seed- 
thought.^^  In  the  Old  Testament  it  was 
first  said,  "The  Lord  of  Hosts  is  Thy  hus- 
band." ^^  In  the  Psalms  the  church  is  rep- 
resented as  the  King's  daughter,  —  a  bride 
brought  to  the  Bridegroom  in  joy  and  glad- 
ness.^* So  Christ's  sermons  on  Himself  as 
the  Light  of  the  world  are  but  paraphrases 
and  amplifications  of  the  thought  which 
runs  through  all  the  prophets,  that  as  sin  is 
darkness  Christ  brings  light.  By  the  side  of 
this  evident  fact,  that  Christ's  teachings  were 
but  the  fuller  expression  of  truths  which 
He  had  first  read  in  the  Old  Testament 
Scriptures,^^  on  which  He  had  poured  the 
light   of   His   divine   consciousness,  express- 


Tested  by  Christ's  Reason.  35 

ing  them  more  fully  by  His  life  and  words, 
put  the  false  and  careless  statement  of  one 
who  claims  to  be  a  New  Testament  Chris- 
tian, and  who  represents  a  few  in  the  evan- 
gelical churches  :  "  The  preaching  and  teach- 
ing of  the  Old  Testament  Scriptures  is  a 
most  unchristian-like  custom,  for  which  Jesus 
nowhere  gives  any  greater  sanction,  explicit 
or  implied,  than  He  does  for  the  indiscrimi- 
nate uses  —  as  if  it  were  the  very  Christian 
Gospel  —  of  Confucius  and  the  Koran."  ^® 
Such  words  could  come  only  from  persons 
who  are  ignorant  of  the  real  contents  of 
the  -Old  Testament,  and  also  of  Christ's 
method  of  using  it,  —  only  from  those  who 
have  studied  books  against  the  Bible,  in- 
stead of  the  Bible  itself. 

It  appears,  then,  from  observing  the  atti- 
tude of  Christ  toward  the  Old  Testament, 
that  if  we  would  follow  Him,  we  should  fill 
our  memories  and  hearts  with  the  history 
and  precepts  of  the  Old  Testament  (as  well 
as  the  New)  as  profitable  for  the  conviction 
and  conversion  and  culture  of  human  souls. 


36  Miist  tJic  Old  Testament  Go  f 


IV. 

Did  Christ's   Moral   Sense  reject  the   Old 
Testament  Histories  as  Incredible? 

Christ  showed  the  falsity  of  that  modern 
view  of  inspiration,  which  claims  correct- 
ness for  the  Scriptures  only  in  their  moral 
and  spiritual  statements,  —  not  in  their  his- 
torical and  scientific  references,  —  in  that  He 
endorsed  the  tnitJifrdness  of  nearly  all  the 
frreat  historic  events  and  miracles  recorded 
ill  the  Old  Testament,  especially  those  most 
sneered  at  to-day. 

"The  whole  controversy  in  Protestantism 
may  be  summed  into  the  question  whether 
the  Bible  is  God's  Word  or  contains  God's 
Word"^''  adulterated  with  numerous  errors. 
This  controversy  is  far  more  important  than 
the  debate  on  Probation,  for  it  underlies 
that   and   all   other   religious    questions.      If 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  History.      37 

the  source  of  the  Bible  is  not  a  super- 
natural God,  but  natural  growth,  and  its 
contents  are  not  truth,  but  a  medley  of 
good  and  evil,  —  if,  in  short,  it  is  mistaken 
in  its  records  of  the  past,  then  it  matters 
little  what  it  says  about  the  future. 

But  I  have  already  shown  that  the  Lord 
Christ  quoted  the  Bible  histories  as  true. 
To  Him  the  Bible  is  the  Word  of  God. 
He  gives  no  encouragement  for  the  theory 
that  it  contains  truth  in  a  solution  of  error. 

He  quoted  as  historic  facts,  with  no  hint 
of  legendary  or  mythological  elements,  with 
no  shock  to  his  moral  sense,  the  stories  of 
our  first  parents  in  Eden,  of  Abel,  of  Noah, 
of  Abraham,  of  Lot,  including  the  destruc- 
tion of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  and  Lot's 
wife  becoming  a  pillar  of  salt ;  of  Isaac,  of 
Jacob,  of  Esau,  of  Moses,  including  the 
burning  bush,  the  miraculous  manna,  and 
the  healing  by  a  look  at  the  brazen  ser- 
pent ;  of  David,  of  Solomon  and  the  Queen 
of  Sheba,  of  Elijah  raising  the  widow's  son, 
of  Elisha  restoring  Naaman,  of  Jonah  saved 


38  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

from    the    great    fish,    and    his    warning   of 
Nineveh,  etc.®^ 

In  some  dry-goods  stores,  in  order  to  pre- 
vent dishonesty  among  the  clerks,  a  three- 
fold system  of  checks  is  used.  A  clerk 
records  each  sale  that  he  makes,  and  his 
number,  on  a  little  block  of  paper,  at  the 
top,  the  centre,  and  the  bottom.  One  of 
these  is  torn  off  and  put  on  the  cashier's 
file ;  another  is  dropped  into  a  locked  box, 
of  which  one  of  the  firm  has  the  key ; 
and  the  other  is  kept  on  the  salesman's 
stub.  At  the  end  of  each  day  the  total 
amount  of  sales  against  the  clerk's  number 
on  these  three  records  must  tally.  The 
cashier's  file  must  confirm  the  salesman's 
stub,  and  the  lock-box  confirms  or  corrects 
the  other  two.  So  God  has  provided  for 
the  confirmation  of  the  historic  truth  of 
His  Word.  First,  the  records  are  given 
in  the  Old  Testament ;  then  they  are  con- 
firmed by  the  quotations  made  by  Christ 
and  His  apostles;  and  more  recently  another 
confirmation    comes   from   the   locked   boxes 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  History.       39 

of  unearthed  Oriental  cities,  which,  as  they 
are  explored,  give  us  on  their  stone  tablets 
a  third  record,  confirming  the  biographical 
and  geographical  accuracy  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament histories. 

By  eight  hundred  and  eighty-nine  quota- 
tions^® and  allusions  to  the  Old  Testament 
in  the  pages  of  the  New,  the  two  portions 
of  the  Bible  are  so  interwoven  that  they 
become  like  the  two  sides  of  a  two-ply  car- 
pet. If  we  cut  the  threads  of  one  side,  we 
have  destroyed  the  other  also.  If  the  Old 
Testament  records  are  not  reliable,  neither 
are  the  words  of  Christ  who  confirmed  them. 
Professor  Swing,  who  claims  to  hold  to 
the  New  Testament  but  rejects  the  Old, 
says,  "The  story  of  the  serpent  and  of  the 
apple,  and  of  the  first  clothing,  might  all 
have  been  added  by  legend.  If  the  ques- 
tion is  asked,  *  Where  shall  the  legendary 
end  and  the  literal  be  allowed  to  com- 
mence?' we  answer,  *No  one  can  tell  this.'" 
There  is  very  little  profit  in  any  part  of  the 
Bible  for  one  who  stands  on  such   shifting 


40  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

sands.  One  might  as  well  anchor  a  ship 
to  a  floating  log.  If  Christ  mistook  an 
Eden  legend  for  a  true  history,  a  thinking 
man  will  very  naturally  infer  that  He  might 
have  been  mistaken  also  in  regard  to  morals 
and  religion.  If  we  cannot  accept  Christ's 
statement  that  Moses  wrote  in  the  book  of 
the  law,  "I  am  the  God  of  Abraham,  Isaac, 
and  Jacob,"  we  may  reasonably  doubt  His 
argument  about  the  resurrection  and  im- 
mortality which  is  given  in  the  same 
verse. 

If  John  was  mistaken  when  he  wrote, 
"The  law  was  given  by  Moses"  (John  i  :  17), 
what  shall  we  do  with  the  other  statement 
in  the  same  verse,  that  "grace  and  truth 
came  by  Jesus  Christ".^  "What  becomes 
of  the  divine  authority  of  the  decalogue,  if 
it  was  not  actually  given  to  Moses  by  the 
finger  of  God  on  the  peaks  of  Sinai ;  if 
those  thunderings  and  lightnings,  and  the 
sound  of  a  trumpet,  and  the  voice  of  Je- 
hovah, are  either  in  whole  or  in  part  myth- 
ical    imagination     and     coloring,     and     not 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  History.      41 

veritable  history?  It  is  impossible  success- 
fully to  maintain  the  credibility  of  the  doc- 
trines of  the  Bible  while  denying  that  of 
the  narratives  which  it  contains."  *''  When 
historical  errors  are  charged  upon  the  Bible 
it  is  usually  found  in  the  end  that  it  was 
the  critics  who  were  in  error  after  all. 
"  Some  years  ago  the  Kuenens  and  Well- 
hausens  of  the  day,  with  their  Robertson 
Smith  echoes,  found  that  the  inspired  writer 
or  compiler  of  the  Chronicles  had  a  very 
big  and  ugly  hole  in  his  inspiration.  He 
had  (2  Chron.  33  :  11)  recorded  that  the  king 
of  Assyria  carried  Manasseh  to  Babylon, 
when,  of  course,  no  king  of  Assyria  would 
have  done  such  a  thing.  He  would  have 
carried  him  to  Nineveh,  his  capital.  But 
the  ignorant  writer,  writing  in  a  late  age, 
perhaps  in  the  Maccabaean  period,  had  a 
dim  notion  of  a  Babylonish  captivity  in  the 
past,  and  therefore  naturally  sent  Manasseh 
to  Babylon.  The  weak-backed  Christians 
rushed  at  once  into  their  favorite  retreat 
in   time   of    danger.      '  Oh !    the    Scriptures 


42  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

were  not  given  to  teach  us  geography  or 
history.'  These  Scriptures  may  make  all 
sorts  of  mistakes  in  every  science,  and  tell 
us  the  moon  is  made  of  green  cheese,  and 
yet  be  God's  holy  word  of  truth  !  Infidels 
chuckle  when  they  find  Christians  ready  to 
acknowledge  that  the  Word  of  God,  so  rev- 
erently quoted  and  exalted  by  our  Lord,  is 
brimful  of  crude  errors  and  ridiculous  mis- 
takes. However,  as  to  Babylon,  when  the 
Assyrian  discoveries  showed  that  Esarhad- 
don,  the  conqueror  of  Manasseh,  lived  not 
at  Nineveh,  but  at  Babylon,  we  did  not 
hear  any  '  Beg  your  pardon '  from  the 
learned  critics,  but  they  went  zealously  to 
work  to  find  another  ugly  hole  in  the 
inspiration  of  the  Bible." '^^  When  a  Chris- 
tian concedes  that  God's  Word  is  not 
necessarily  to  be  considered  "truth"  ex- 
cept in  its  moral  and  religious  references, 
he  surrenders  the  outer  breastworks  of 
supernaturalism,  and  opens  the  way  for  an 
attack  upon  the  second  line  of  defenses, 
by  the  theory  that   if   there    were    mistakes 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  History.      43 

in  the  Old  Testament  about  matters  of 
history,  there  might  be  errors  also  about 
its  laws ;  and  those  who  surrender  to  that 
attack  generally  feel  it  necessary  to  give 
up  the  third  line  of  defenses  also,  and 
accept  the  theory  that  even  Christ  was  not 
"the  Truth"  in  all  His  statements,  which 
leaves  the  very  citadel  of  supernaturalism 
defenseless. 

"The  Bible  was  given  to  teach  us  how 
to  go  to  Heaven,  not  to  teach  us  how  the 
heavens  go,"  says  a  Christian,  too  hastily 
conceding,  what  has  never  been  proved,  that 
the  Bible  is  inaccurate  in  its  scientific  refer- 
ences. Infidelity  having  driven  the  Christian 
from  that  breastwork,  makes  a  new  attack  on 
the  age  and  authorship  of  Bible  books,  and 
again  he  hurriedly  retreats,  saying,  "Jesus 
Christ  and  His  apostles  did  not  come  into 
the  world  to  preach  Criticism  to  the  Jews," 
which  means  that  Christ  couldn't  distinguish 
true  history  from  forgeries.  His  Father's 
laws  from  Ezra's.  It  is  the  first  step  that 
costs,  —  surrendering  in  a  false  liberality  the 


44  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

outer    breastworks    of    the    Bible's    historic 
truthfulness. 

If  as  Christians  we  really  take  Christ  as 
our  authority,  we  shall  read  the  Old  Tes- 
tament stories  with  confidence,  as  true  rec- 
ords of  the  way  in  which  God  has  dealt 
with  men,  and  thus  find  them  "profitable," 
as  indicating  His  feelings  toward  us,  and 
His  providential  relations  to  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  men. 


Did  Ezra  Deceive  Christ?  45 


V. 

Did  Ezra  Deceive  Christ  ? 

Jesus  uniformly  spoke  of  the  Pentateuch  in 
such  a  way  as  to  show  His  agreement  with 
the  imiversal  JewisJi  belief  in  its  Mosaic  au- 
thorship. 

(i.)  He  said  to  the  Jews,  as  one  appeal- 
ing to  a  certainty  that  was  universally  ac- 
knowledged, "  Did  not  Moses  give  you  the 
law,  and  yet  none  of  you  doeth  the  law  ? " 
(John  7  :  19;  cf.  John  i  :  17.)  That  ques- 
tion shows  that  Christ  did  not  agree  with 
the  modern  critics  either  in  denying  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch,  or  in 
the  belief  that  the  non-observance  of  the  law 
■broved  its   non-existence. 

The  word  "Law,"  or  "Thorah,"  as  used 
in  Christ's  time,  had  a  specific  and  exact 
import,  —  exactly  what   we  mean   by   "  The 


46  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

Pentateuch,"  which  was  then  one  book. 
Therefore,  when  Christ  associated  the  name 
of  Moses  with  it.  He  was  understood  to 
coincide  with  tlie  general  belief  in  its  Mo- 
saic authorship,  against  which  not  a  doubt 
was  uttered,  even  among  the  Jews,  until  the 
ninth  century,  twenty-four  hundred  years 
after  Moses,  and  thirteen  hundred  years  after 
Ezra.  The  fundamental  principle  of  inter- 
pretation is  to  put  ourselves  in  the  place 
of  those  to  whom  an  utterance  was  orig- 
inally made,  and  ask.  What  meaning  did 
the  words  convey?  —  not,  What  meaning  can 
we  put  into  them  .-*  Unquestionably,  Christ's 
words  conveyed  the  meaning  to  his  hearers 
that  He  believed  with  them  in  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch. 

Only  such  "  forced  interpretations  "  as  a 
distinguished  Unitarian  recently  admitted 
were  necessary,  in  order  to  make  the  Bible 
anything  else  but  an  "  orthodox  book ; " 
such  interpretations  as  would  destroy 
Christ's  deity, — can  make  Christ's  words 
mean  anything  else  than  an  agreement  with 


Did  Ezra  Deceive  Christ  ?  47 

Jewish  belief  that  the  Pentateuch  was 
"given"    by   Moses. 

The  oft-repeated  expression  of  Clirist  (as 
well  as  other  Bible  writers),  "  The  law  of 
Moses,"  ^^  had  the  same  import, 

(2.)  But  Christ  not  only  spoke  of  the 
Pentateuch  as  given  by  Moses,  but  also 
referred  to  it  as  "his  writings."  He  said 
to  the  Jews  :  "  If  ye  believed  Moses,  ye 
would  believe  me ;  for  he  wrote  of  me. 
But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  how 
shall  ye  believe  my  words  .-^  "  *^  In  numerous 
other  passages  Christ  and  His  disciples 
speak  of  Moses  as  one  who  zurote,  not 
merely  a  single  prophecy  of  Christ  (in  Deu- 
teronomy), but  many,^^  such  as  we  find  all 
through  the  Pentateuch,  especially  in  Gen- 
esis, the  very  part  whose  Mosaic  authorship 
is  most  disputed. 

The  titles  which  Christ  applied  to  the 
Pentateuch,  "  Moses,"  and  "  Book  of  Mo- 
ses," *®  as  several  of  the  critics  have  ad- 
mitted,^'' mean  at  least  that  Moses  was  the 
"central    figure,"    the    "chief    person,"    of 


48  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

Pentateuchal  history  and  law.  But  even  the 
conservative  criticism  tliat  claims  as  written 
by  Moses  all  of  those  individual  laws  or 
prophecies  of  the  Pentateuch  which  are 
specifically  declared  in  the  Old  or  New 
Testament  to  have  been  written  by  him, 
leaves  to  Moses  only  a  tithe  of  his  Penta- 
teuch, —  nineteen  chapters  of  one  hundred 
and  eighty-seven.^^  These  critics  therefore 
destroy  their  own  explanation.  They  do  not 
even  allow  him  to  be  "the  chief  person." 

If  the  Pentateuch  was  to  be  named  from 
its  central  figures  (the  critics  being  judges), 
it  would  be  "The  Pentateuch  of  the  Elo- 
hist,  and  the  Jehovist,  and  the  Second 
Elohist  in  close  connection  with  the  Jeho- 
hist,  and  the  author  of  the  Priest  Code, 
and  the  Deuteronomist,  and  the  Redactors." 
"As  to  this  Moses  we  wot  not  what  has 
become  of  him";  but  as  to  the  Redactor 
"the  critics  always  know  where  to  find  him 
when  they  want  him,  which  is  more  than 
we  can   say  for   all   the   critics." 

If   the   majority   of   the   critics   are  right, 


Did  Esra  Deceive  Christ  ?  49 

Christ  was  either  a  deceiver  or  deceived, 
when  He  called  the  Pentateuch  "the  Book 
of  Moses,"  instead  of  "the  Book  of  Ezra," 
even  though  He  meant  only  that  Moses 
was  "the  central  figure."  According  to  the 
critics,  He  should  have  seen  it  was  like 
the  Presbyterian  Review,  made  up  of  half 
a  dozen  independent  and  sometimes  con- 
tradictory documents,  put  together  with  no 
attempt  at  harmony  by  a  redactor,  alias 
editor,  who  is  "not  responsible  for  the 
views  expressed  in  each  article,  but  only 
for  the  propriety  of  admitting  the  article," 
alias   document. 

It  is  certain,  then,  that  Christ's  refer- 
ences to  the  Pentateuch  offer  nothing  but 
confirmation  to  the  universal  belief  of  His 
time,  that  Moses  was  not  only  "the  cen- 
tral figure"  and  "the  law-giver"  of  the 
Pentateuch,  but  also  its  writer.  Robert- 
son Smith,  referring  to  his  theory  that 
most  of  the  laws  in  the  Pentateuch  which 
are  declared  in  their  context  to  have  been 
given   by   God    to    Moses,    were   really  com- 


50  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

posed  by  Ezra  a  thousand  years  later,  says, 
"The  current  view  of  the  Pentateuch  is 
mainly  concerned  to  do  literal  justice  to 
the  phrase,  'The  Lord  spake  unto  Moses, 
saying.'  "  Nay,  it  is  mainly  concerned  to 
do  justice  to  the  words  of  Jesus,  "Did 
not  Moses  give  you  the  law?"  and  other 
passages  in  which  He  declared  the  Mosaic 
authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  so  plainly, 
that  even  Robertson  Smith  and  Colenso 
(both  members  of  evangelical  churches) 
were  driven,  in  loyalty  to  their  theories, 
to  say  with  Unitarians  that  He  was  either 
deceived  or  a  deceiver.  Strangely  enough, 
Robertson  Smith  omitted  from  his  book 
on  the  Old  Testament  all  consideration 
of  the  testimony  of  this  Chief  Witness. 
In  his  trial,  however,  he  took  the  position 
that  Christ,  as  well  as  the  other  Jews  of 
His  time,  was  deceived  by  the  "legal 
fiction"  of  Ezra  into  believing  that  the 
laws  of  the  latter  were,  as  they  claimed 
to  be,  "the  law  of  Moses."  "A  legal 
fiction "    is    defined    as    a    device    in    le^ral 


Did  Ec7'a  Deceive  Christ  ?  51 

records,  such  as  the  use  of  the  imaginary 
names  of  "John  Doe"  and  "Richard  Roe," 
by  way  of  illustration,  in  describing  certain 
supposable  cases  of  litigation  concretely, 
a  convention  which  everybody  understands, 
and  which  therefore  deceives  nobody.  But 
Ezra's  "legal  fiction,"  it  is  admitted, 
■deceived  everybody,  even  the  Son  of  God. 
The  nearest  parallels  to  Ezra's  alleged 
"legal  fiction"  are  those  of  Joseph  Smith 
and  Mohammed,  who  forged  not  the  name 
of  Moses  but  of  God  Himself,  "to  give 
their  lazvs  impressiveness  and  historic  prec- 
edent,"   as   the    critics    would    say. 

The  testimony  of  Christ  as  to  the 
Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Pentateuch  has 
been  so  universally  considered  as  clear  and 
final  by  evangelical  Christians,  that  the 
question,  although  discussed  somewhat  by 
Jews  since  the  ninth  century,  and  by 
Roman  Catholics  and  infidels  since  the 
early  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  has 
never  been  deemed  worthy  of  special  notice 
until  of  late.     A  few  professors  and  preachers 


52  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

connected  with  evangelical  churches  have 
become  so  inoculated  with  German  ration- 
alism as  to  say  that  Christ  was  either 
deceived  or  a  deceiver  in  His  statements 
about  Moses,  or  else  that  we  are  deceived 
in  interpreting  His  words  by  the  meaning 
they   reaHy    conveyed. 

In  these  three  theories  we  recognize  three 
old  foes  with  new  faces.  The  irrational  tac- 
tics which  all  evangelical  Christians  con- 
demned when  used  by  so-called  rationalists 
against  Christ  and  the  gospels,  are  now 
taken  up  by  some  evangelical  professors, 
editors,  and  preachers  against  Moses  and 
the    Pentateuch. 

As  it  was  said  by  radical  Unitarians  in 
the  controversies  about  Christ,  that  in  His 
statements  about  His  own  deity,  He  was 
either  deceived  by  flattery,  though  great, 
or  else  was  a  passive  deceiver,  although  unap- 
proachably good,  so  now  that  same  straigJit 
crook  is  offered  us  by  nominal  Evangelicals 
in  the  irrationalism  which  says  that  the 
good  Ezra    might    have    deceived    the   Jews 


Did  Ezra  Deceive  Christ  ?  53 


and  Jesus,  or  that  Christ  Himself  might 
have  known  that  Moses  was  not  the  author 
of  the  Pentateuch  and  yet  have  innocently 
spoken  of  him  as  such.  One  of  the  evan- 
gelical critics  recently  took  the  ground,  that 
Christ  was  sometimes  mistaken  even  in  His 
expositions  of  Old  Testament  texts,  such 
as  the  passage  "  concerning  the  bush " 
(Luke    20  :  Z7)- 

As  some  conservative  Unitarians,  by 
"forced  interpretations,"  attempt  to  show 
that  we  have  been  deceived  in  under- 
standing Christ's  words  about  His  deity, 
in  accordance  with  their  natural  and  evi- 
dent meaning;  so  several  evangelical  pro- 
fessors of  late  have  reverently  applied 
rationalistic  tortures  to  the  words  of  Christ, 
which  even  the  critics  generally  admit  to 
be  plain  declarations  of  the  Mosaic  author- 
ship of  the  Pentateuch  (although  erroneous, 
as  they  claim),  and  seek  to  show  that  they 
may  mean  only  that  Moses  was  a  contrib- 
utor to  the  Pentateuch,  not  its  author  or 
editor. 


54  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

The  real  questions  at  issue,  then,  as  in 
the  Unitarian  controversy,  are.  Can  good- 
ness dehberately  deceive  ?  ^^  Can  divine 
greatness  be  easily  deceived  ?  Is  the  natu- 
ral or  the  ingenious  and  "forced  inter- 
pretation "    of   a   passage   to   be   received  ? 

It  vv^ill  not  do  to  say  that  Christ  might 
be  ignorant  of  the  sciences  of  "  Biblical 
criticism"  and  of  geology,  and  still  meet 
our  want  as  a  religious  teacher."  What- 
ever He  did  or  did  not  know  of  natural 
science.  He  certainly  was  not  competent 
to  be  the  world's  religious  teacher  if  He 
could  not  tell  the  true  from  the  false  in 
the  very  text-book  of  religion  that  He  was 
sent  from  Heaven  to  expound  to  man. 
The  reasonings  on  these  points  of  even  the 
professedly  evangelical  critics,  strongly  re- 
mind us  of  that  school  of  miscalled  ration- 
alists who  attempted  some  years  ago  to 
prove  that  the  miracles  of  Christ  did  not 
really  occur,  without  impugning  the  truth- 
fulness of  the  evangelists,  who,  they  say, 
"  thought     it     no     harm     to     describe     the 


Did  Ezra  Deceive  Christ  ?  55 

wading  of  Christ  through  the  water  as 
walking  upon  it."  This  old  blunderbuss  that 
was  long  ago  laughed  out  of  the  New 
Testament  conflict,  even  by  infidels  them- 
selves, has  been  renamed  "  Higher  Criti- 
cism," and  brought  as  a  new  rifle  into 
the  Old  Testament  battle  "  for  the  de- 
fence {^)  of  Christianity"  even  by  Evangel- 
icals, who  do  not  see  that  it  kicks  harder 
than  it  shoots.  Compare  the  "rationalism" 
and  "orthodoxy"  of  the  following  extracts  :  — 


56 


Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


Rationalistic  or  Unitari- 
an Explanation  of  the 
Ascension  of  Christ. 
"  The  truth  probably  is, 
that  the  early  disciples,  who 
thoiLgJU  they  had  seen  the 
risen  Jesus, /;z/«';W  from  the 
discontinuauceof  his«///Wi-i/ 
appearances  that  he  had  as- 
cended into  heaven.  The  ar- 
tistic writer  of  the  third  gospel 
probably  received  this  infer- 
ence as  7\s2ibstaniial  truth,  but 
thought  it  no  harm  to  embellish 
z/and  make  it  the  groundwork 
of  a, thrilling  scene.  His  style 
plainly  indicates  that  he  was 
a  man  of  some  culture  and 
considerable  reading.  He 
could  not  have  failed  to  learn 
that  the  historians  of  his  time 
were  accustomed  to  take  sim- 
ilar liberties  with  historical 
trnth." —  [From  The  Radical, 
of  Boston,  deceased  organ  of 
radical  Unitarians.] 

Unitarian  Explanation 
of  the  Raising  of  Laz- 
arus. 

Renan  tells  us  that  Christ 
and  the  family  at  Bethany 
were  ^^ persons  of  the  purest 
motives"  and  then  explains 
the  miracle  by  saying  that 
probably  Lazarus,  being  sick 
and  ])a)e,  and  knowing  that 
Christ  was  coming,  allowed 
himself  to  be  ];ut  into  a  tomb 
that  he  might  seem  Uj  rise 
from  the  dead,  and  thus  give 
great  glory  to  Christ. 


"Critical"  Theory  of 
the  Pentaieuch  i;y  an 
"  Evangelical"  Preach- 
er. 

[Italics  ours.] 
"The  book  that  Hilkiah 
claimed  to  have  rediscoz:ered 
(2  Kings  22  :  8),  then  for  the 
first  time  'written,  in  the  inter- 
ests of  an  ethical  and  spiritual 
religion,  was  none  other  than 
the  substance  of  the  book 
of  Deuteronomy.  The  pro- 
granune  of  the  prophetic  re- 
formers, presented  in  its  ti'tie 
light  as  a  development  of  the 
ideas  of  Moses,  was  by  the 
prophet  Hilkiah  sent  to  the 
king  as  the  law  of  the  nation's 
founder.  Read  in  this  light, 
the  book  takes  on  a  fresh  and 
fascinating  interest.  Rightly 
did  legislators  and  historians 
through  the  after  ages  look 
back  and  ascri/>e  all  their 
-coork^'^  in  the  development 
of  the  national  life  to  Jl/oses." 
—  [From  "Wrong  Uses  of 
the  Bible,"  by  Rev.  R.  Heber 
Newton,  Episcopalian,  after 
Prof.  \V.  Robertson  Smith, 
Presbyterian.] 


Did  Ezra  Deceive   Christ  f  57 

Whatever  may  be  said  of  Bible  histo- 
rians, evidently  some  modern  critics  "think 
it  no  harm  to  take  liberties  with  historical 
truth."  God  must  not  work  miracles,  but 
the  critics  can.  They  alone  can  make  a- 
straight  crook ;  a  Saint  Ezra,  the  forger ; 
a   God-man   deceived. 

So  at  every  point  the  critics-  seek  to  re- 
lieve us  of  little  difficulties  by  substituting 
greater  ones.  With  beams  in  their  own 
eyes  they  are  seeking  to  remove  motes 
from  ours.  They  strain  out  a  gnat  from 
the  Bible's  theories,  but  swallow  a  camel 
in  their  own.  Critics  may  laugh  at  the 
uninspired  and  improbable  tradition,  given 
in  the  Apocrypha,  that  all  of  the  earlier 
portions  of  the  Old  Testament,  after  being 
burned  up,  were  miraculously  restored  by 
Ezra ;  but  tJicy  ask  us  to  believe  the  yet 
greater  miracle,  that  they  can  go  behind 
the  scenes  of  far-off  centuries  and  tell  us 
just  when  and  where  three  or  six  or  seven 
authors  and  editors  had  their  quilting-bees 
to    make   a   patchwork    Pentateuch,    adding 


58  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

to  this  miracle  of  "intuition,"  which  sur- 
passes even  the  traditional  one  of  Ezra's 
memory,  those  masterpieces  of  all  miracles, 
the  theory  of  a  holy  forger  and  a  deceived 
deity. 

The  chief  question,  then,  involved  in  the 
present  controversy  about  the  Pentateuch, 
is  not.  Did  Ezra  write  most  of  the  Penta- 
teuch ?  but  rather,  Did  Ezra  deceive  Christ  ? 
that  is,  Did  a  good  man  deceive  the  God- 
man  ?  —  a  question  of  the  highest  impor- 
tance ;  a  question  of  ethics  and  theology 
more  than  of  Hebrew  roots  ;  a  question  not 
so  much  of  learning  as  of  logic ;  a  New 
Testament  question  as  well  as  an  Old  Tes- 
tament one  ;  a  question  less  of  criticism  than 
of  character  ;  a  question  for  the  laity  as  well 
as  for  scholars,  since  its  solution  depends  less 
on  wtcommon  learning  than  on  commoji  sense. 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  59 


VI. 

Will  the  New  Theories  about  the  Old  Tes- 
tament BEAR  the  Tests  of  Logic 

Before  considering  the  deep  questions 
which  we  should  need  to  examine  it  there 
were  any  rehable  evidence  that  Ezra  de- 
ceived Christ,  our  logic  and  common  sense 
arc  called  to  the  easier  task  of  testing  the 
theories  of  the  critics  about  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, to  see  if  their  premises  are  well-attested 
facts,  and  their  conclusions  well  taken ;  in 
short,  to  ascertain  if  this  so-called  "  Higher 
Criticism  "  is,  as  it  proudly  claims,  a  ^'science" 
to  which  we  need  to  "reconcile"  our  the- 
ology. This  examination  of  the  logic  of  the 
critics  requires  no  conflict  with  their  learn- 
ing. ^^  Because  the  men  who  do  this  tJiing 
are  learned  men,  thousands  are  ready  to  fol- 
low  them,  or  at   least   to   shake   their  heads 


6o  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

very  zvisely  at  tJich"  dicta,  as  if  these  were 
oracles  not  to  be  despised.  But  learned  men 
have  often  been  the  biggest  of  fools.  The 
knowledge  of  Hebrew  and  all  the  Semitic 
languages,  however  thorough  and  exhaustive, 
does  not  make  a  man  wise.  The  learning 
of  a  whole  university  does  not  give  a  man 
common  sense."  ^^  If  conclusions  are  not 
found  to  be  well-taken,  when  tested  by  the 
familiar  laws  of  evidence  and  reasoning",  no 
amount  of  learning  can  save  their  theories. 
No  matter  how  good  the  bricks  may  be  in 
a  house,  it  cannot  stand  unless  it  has  been 
properly  built. 

(i.)  At  the  outset  we  see  unmistakable 
evidence  that  most  of  the  critics  enter 
upon  their  investigation  with  an  unscien- 
tific bias  against  the  supernatural,  to  which 
is  added,  in  many  cases,  a  prejudice  in 
favor  of  evolution.  A  true  scientist,  even 
when  he  begins  his  examination  of  phe- 
nomena with  a  "working  hypothesis" 
already  in  mind,  seeks  to  test  it,  not  to 
prove   it.     If   the   facts   do   not  confirm    his 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  6 1 

theory,  he  does  not  twist  them  into  con- 
formity. He  is  open  to  conviction  that  his 
theory  is  wrong.  But  take  the  dozen  most 
influential  men  of  the  Higher  Criticism, 
from  its  beginning,  —  Astruc,  Eichhorn, 
De  Wette,  Ewald,  Colenso,  Reuss,  Kuenen, 
Wellhausen,  Vatke,  Kalisch,  Robertson 
Smith,  and  Hermann  Strack,  —  and  ask 
eacli  one  of  this  jury,  "Could  any  amount 
of  evidence  prove  to  you  the  reality  of 
miracles,  that  is  of  the  supernatural.''" 
"Are  you  persuaded,  in  advance,  that 
evolution  must  be  the  law  of  religious 
history.''"  A  majority  of  this  jury  would 
answer  "No"  to  the  first  question,  or 
"Yes"  to  the  second,  or  both.  As  Pro- 
fessor Curtis  has  said,  "The  modern  critical 
theory,  before  beginning  investigation, 
banishes  the  Divine  factor  from  history." 
It  is  like  the  trial  of  Stephen.  A  majority 
of  this  modern  critical  court  decides  in 
advance  of  investigation,  that  the  religion 
of  the  Old  Testament  is  not  a  universal, 
but    only    a    national,   religion ;    and   before 


62  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

the  trial  is  fairly  begun,  they  are  impetu- 
ously hurling  their  speculations  and  im- 
proved dogmas  in  their  .attempted  martyr- 
dom   of   the   supernatural. 

The  prejudice  in  favor  of  evolution 
(which  even  Darwin  never  claimed  was 
anything  more  than  a  probable  hypothesis, 
and  which  leaves  so  many  missing  links 
that  even  Professor  Swing  ridicules  its  raw 
theories,  and  the  editor  of  TJic  Index  calls 
for  more  proofs,  and  while  many  other 
scholars  who  have  certainly  no  prejudice 
against  it,  show  its  inconsistency),  —  this 
prejudice  in  favor  of  evolution  as  the  uni- 
versal plan  of  history,  as  well  as  nature, 
has  proved  in  the  minds  of  these  critics  a 
camera  obscitra  to  reverse  the  real  position 
of  things  so  that  the  decline  and  tall  of 
the   Jewish    nation  appears  to  them   as    a 

"Grand  Forward  March." 
David. 

Jezebel. 

Captivity. 

Crucifixion. 

Dispersion. 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  6^ 

(2.)    It  is  also  especially  notable  that  the 
experts    and    specialists     of     this     so-called 
science,    all   of    them    claiming   to   work   by 
the  same  scientific  methods,  disagree  vitally     (^ 
and  radically  on  most  of  the  points  at  issue. 

"Gesenius,  De  Wette,  Ewald,  and  Bleek 
say  that  Deuteronomy  was  composed  long 
after  the  rest  of  the  Pentateuch.  Von  Boh- 
len,  Vater,  Vatke,  and  Reuss  assert  that  it 
was  written  first,  and  is  the  source  of  the 
ceremonial  parts  of  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and 
Numbers.  Ewald  finds  seven  different  doc- 
uments, and  five  different  authors,  in  the 
Pentateuch ;  others  see  two  different  docu- 
ments, and  two  different  authors."  ^^ 

Professor  Briggs  admits  that  while  some 
suppose  the  second  Elohist  was  used  by  the 
Jehovist,  others  think  that  he  was  used  by 
the  redactor  of  the  Elohist  and  Jehovist. 
Some  regard  the  Jehovist  as  the  redactor 
of  all  but  Deuteronomy,  others  the  Deu- 
teronomist  as  the  redactor  of  the  whole. 
The  experts  of  this  so-called  Higher  Criti- 
cism differ  six  hundred  years  on  the  age  of 


64  Mjist  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

Obadiah,  a  thousand  years  on  the  age  of 
Job,  eleven  hundred  years  on  the  age  of 
Deuteronomy.  Hitzig  ascribes  fourteen  of 
the  Psalms  to  David  ;  Ewald,  by  the  same 
swift  and  scientific  intuitions,  finds  that  he 
wrote  only  eleven  ;  while  Delitzsch  considers 
forty-four  Davidic.  Strack  admits  that  while 
the  critics  generally  agree  in  the  belief  that 
there  are  five  documents  woven  together  in 
the  Pentateuch,  there  is  no  general  agree- 
ment as  to  their  order  and  age.  Differences 
of  style  which  he  considers  marks  of  dif- 
ferent authors,  Wellhausen  cites  as  proof 
of  different  periods  of  composition.  "  What 
value  is  to  be  attached  to  the  argument 
of  the  Higher  Critics,  as  to  the  '  Style 
and  Diction '  of  the  so-called  Elohistic  and 
Jehovistic  documents,  may  be  learned  from 
the  fact  that  the  ablest  German  Critics,  a 
short  time  ago,  proved  from  the  'Style  and 
Diction'  of  the  Elohistic  document  that  it  was 
the  oldest  of  all  and  the  basis  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch, whereas  the  later  German  Higher 
Critics  all  prove,  from  the  same  '  Style  and 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  65 

Diction,'  that  it    is  the  yoiingest  of   all,  and 
of   post-exile   origin.""^ 

"  Those  subtle  critics  who  claim  to  pos- 
sess what  they  call  a  power  of  Higher  Crit- 
icism are  proved  to  be  in  the  wrong  by  a 
simple  fact  which  is  apprehensible  by  any 
ordinary  person  so  soon  as  it  is  stated. 
They  tell  us  that  they  can  point  out  how 
much  Moses  wrote,  or  how  much  Isaiah 
wrote,  and  how  much  other  people  wrote, 
by  an  inner  consciousness,  a  capacity  which 
enables  them  to  detect  various  styles  and 
variety  of  treatment  ;  and  yet  in  spite  of 
this  inner  consciousness  they  contradict 
each  other,  and  we  find  almost  as  many 
schools  of  critics  as  there  are  separate 
critics.  One  man  finds  three  writers  in 
Genesis,  while  another  discovers  seven ; 
they  are  not  agreed  among  themselves, 
though  they  have  this  inner  faculty  which 
enables  them  to  detect  styles  and  charac- 
teristics ;  they  are  self-contradictory,  and 
each  man  becomes  the  standard  whereby 
he  determines  his  own  result.     The  fact  is, 


66  Must  ike  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

each  man  ,re-edits  the  Bible  according  to  his 
own  nature,  or  wish,  or  idea,  so  that  it  be- 
comes merely  a  book  after  his  own  heart."  ^^ 
By  these  manuscript  laws  we  are  told 
that  the  last  part  of  Isaiah  cannot  have 
been  by  the  same  author  as  the  first  part, 
because  there  is  a  slight  difference  of  style. 
Precisely  the  same  logic  would  show  that 
Cowper's  "Task"  and  "John  Gilpin" 
could  not  have  come  from  the  same  poet. 
The  following  from  Bredenkamp,  of  Erlan- 
ger,  is  interesting  as  to  the  argument  from 
style :  "  So  long  as  Julius  Fuerst  assigns 
those  parts  of  Genesis  to  pre-Mosaic  time, 
which  WellJiausen  relegates  to  post-exile 
time,  and  the  language  interposes  no  veto 
to  either ;  so  long  as  specialists  can  con- 
found the  beginning  and  the  end  of  a  his- 
torical period  of  language  a  thousand  years 
in  duration  ;  so  long  will  this  branch  of  Old 
Testament  Science  be  obliged  to  be  regarded 
as  yet  only  in  its  szvaddling-clothesJ'  De- 
litzsch,  although  himself  affected  by  a  vario- 
loid  type   of    this    Higher   Criticism,    says  : 


Ci'iticisni   Tested  by  Logic.  6y 

"Many  of  the  former  results  of  the  critical 
school  are  now  out  of  fashion.  Its  present 
results  often  contradict  each  other.  In 
reality  we  know  little  and  imagine  that  we 
know  much."  It  is  this  masterpiece  of 
guess-work  which  Robertson  Smith  calls  a 
"science,"  and  compares  with  the  well- 
established  natural  sciences.  The  so-called 
"Higher  Criticism"  has  in  it  perhaps  "the 
power  and  potency "  of  a  future  science, 
but  its  evolution  lias  not  yet  passed  the 
period   of  chaos. 

What  would  be  the  standing  of  a  so- 
called  science  of  literature,  some  of  whose 
experts,  by  the  study  of  Shakespeare's 
style,  located  his  works  in  the  days  of 
Alfred,  while  others,  of  equal  standing 
and  following  the  same  principles,  were 
quite  as  positive  that  they  were  produced 
in  the  days  of  Victoria,  and  yet  others 
contended  that  the  Merry  Wives  of  Wind- 
sor was  so  different  in  style  from  Mac- 
beth that  it  must  have  been  added  by  a 
pseudo-Shakespeare. 


F 


68  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

"This  'Higher  Criticism'  was  rampant 
in  the  secular  sphere  long  before  it  began 
to  lay  hands  on  the  sacred  ark.  Asser's 
'Life  of  Alfred'  was  a  few  years  ago  as 
confidently  asserted  to  be  the  work  of  a 
later  age,  as  is  the  second  part  of  Isaiah. 
Mr.  Freeman  and  the  best  scholars  now 
hold  that  it  is  in  the  main  a  valuable 
contemporary   record   of    fact."^'' 

Similar  mistakes  were  made  in  regard 
to  Homer  also,  as  Schliemann's  explora- 
tions have  shown.  But  with  all  the  confi- 
dence of  infallibility  and  omniscience  these 
disagreeing  critics  assume  to  tell  just 
where  in  a  sentence  of  the  Bible  the 
"redactor"  spliced  the  work  of  the 
"Elohist"  and  "Jehovist,"  or  corrected  the 
"  Deuteronomist." 

(3.)  Even  the  points  on  which  thcj'e  is 
most  general  agreement  among  tJie  critics 
ai'e  far  from  proven. 

Professor  Curtis  voices  the  sentiment  of 
the  church's  scholarship,  and  its  common 
sense     as      well,      when      he      says,      "  We 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  69 

reject  the  conclusions  of  the  modern 
critical  school,  because  their  dicta  are 
not  established.  They  do  not  rest  on 
scientific  certainty,  but  rather  on  hy- 
potheses." 

The  earliest  claim  of  the  "Higher  Criti- 
cism," on  which  most  of  its  experts  have 
agreed  during  several  centuries,  is  the 
theory  that  there  are  incorporated  into 
Genesis  at  least  two  distinct  manuscripts, 
distinguished  from  each  other  in  that  the 
one  uses  the  word  JeJiovah  and  the  other 
EloJiiniy  —  the  first  corresponding  to  the 
word  Lord,  and  the  second  to  the  word 
God,  —  both  of  which,  it  is  claimed,  could 
not  have  been  written  by  Moses.  It  would 
be  about  as  reasonable  to  declare  that  two 
sermons  of  a  modern  preacher  were  not 
by  the  same  man,  because  in  one  of  them 
he  used  the  word  Christ,  —  presenting  His 
kingship ;  and  in  the  other,  chiefly  the 
word  Jesus,  —  speaking  of  His  power  to 
save.  Lange  is  probably  right  in  saying 
that    "the  two   names   for  God    in    Genesis 


70  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

are  not  marks  of  two  manuscripts,  but  of 
two   relations    of   God." 

Why  do  not  the  critics  claim  that  Paul's 
Epistle  to  Titus  is  a  patchwork  of  five 
manuscripts,  because  in  it  he  uses  five 
names  of  Christ,  or  that  the  first  chapters 
of  Matthew  and  Mark  are  added  by  a 
pseudo-evangelist,  because  only  over  the 
gateways  of  those  two  gospels  is  found 
the   double   name    of    "Jesus    Christ"? 

It  would  no  more  disprove  the  inspira- 
tion and  Mosaic  authorship  of  the  Penta- 
teuch to  show  that  Moses  used  other 
documents  besides  "The  Book  of  the  Wars 
of  the  Lord,"  from  which  he  expressly 
quotes,  than  it  would  disprove  Macaulay's 
authorship  of  his  English  history,  to  show 
that  he  used  pre-existing  documents,  — 
indeed,  all  through  the  Bible  its  inspired 
authors  quote  from  other  documents,  sacred 
and  profane, — but  the  two  names  of  God 
prove  little  or  nothing.  If  they  prove  the 
Pentateuch  a  patchwork,  they  prove  the 
same  for  every   book   of  the   Old  Testament, 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  '^i 

except  the  Book  of  Esther  and  the  Song 
of  Solomon,  for  in  all,  except  these  two, 
both  of  the  divine  names  frequently  appear. 
Indeed,  both  names  appear  all  through 
some  chapters  and  in  many  single  verses,^* 
where,  perhaps,  the  documents  of  the 
Elohist    and   Jehovist    collided. 

Even  if  the  one  point  on  which  the  critics 
are  generally  united,  that  the  Pentateuch 
is  documentary,  should  be  granted,  that  is 
not  inconsistent  with  the  evangelical  the- 
ory ^^  that  Moses  wrote  at  least  a  large 
part  of  them  himself  and  was  the  in- 
spired "redactor"  of  them  all,  —  the  few 
side  references  that  indicate  a  later  time 
being  all  easily  accounted  for,  as  Profes- 
sor Curtis  has  said,  as  marginal  notes  of 
the  Scribes  which  accidentally  got  into  the 
text. 

What  if  there  are  three  codes  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch .'•  Suppose  one  was  "  the  priest's 
code"  forever,  and  another  "the  people's 
code "  in  the  wilderness,  and  the  third 
(in  Deuteronomy)    "the   people's   code"  for 


"J  2  MiLst  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

their  new  circumstances  in  the  land  of 
promise,  given  proplietically  in  advance,  as 
it  claims  to  be,  by  one  who  knew  they 
would  have  "gates"  and  "kings"  and 
"ships"?  These  are  not  evidence  of  later 
origin  than  the  days  of  Moses,  except  to 
one  whom  no  evidence  can  convince  of  the 
reality  of  supernatural  prophecy. 

Another  of  the  points  of  quite  general 
agreement  among  the  critics  is  the  claim 
that  the  non-observance  of  many  laws  of 
the  Pentateuch  during  a  large  portion  of 
Israel's  history,  proves  their  non-existence, 
notwithstanding  repeated  statements  in  the 
Bible  about  such  ordinances  existing  when 
neglected/'*  In  the  same  way  the  "  Dark 
Ages"  prove  that  the  spiritual  teachings  of 
the  New  Testament  were  really  "for  the 
first  time  written"  by  Luther  in  the  book 
which  he  "claimed  to  have  rediscovered" 
in  the  monastery  library.  The  true  expla- 
nation of  non-observance  is  that  the  Penta- 
teuch was  for  a  long  time  a  generally 
unrealized  ideal  of  obedience,  as  the  gospels 


Criticism    Tested  by  Logic.  73 

are  still  a  generally  unrealized  ideal  of  love 
and  trust. 

Yet  another  argument  adduced  for  the 
theory  that  the  Levitical  legislation  did  not 
exist  before  Ezra,  is  the  fact  that  the 
prophets  spoke  against  sacrifices  and  feasts 
as  a  dependence  for  salvation.  But  this 
same  mode  of  reasoning  would  prove  that 
the  preachers  of  to-day,  who  denounce 
heartless  participation  in  the  Lord's  Supper 
and  the  superstitious  use  of  baptism  as  a 
substitute  for  regeneration,  have  not  yet  re- 
ceived the  divine  commands  of  Christ  to 
baptize  in  His  name,  and  take  the  bread 
and  wine  in  remembrance  of  Him. 

It  is  confidently  urged,  that  the  law  in 
Deuteronomy  against  marrying  foreign 
wives  ®^  could  not  have  existed  until  after 
the  days  of  David  and  Solomon,  because 
they  did  not  obey  it.  That  same  "critical" 
logic  would  prove  that  the  law  against 
adultery,  which  is  admitted  to  be  Mosaic, 
was  not  yet  given.  If  we  argued  what  laws 
are  and  when  they  came   into   force  by  the 


74  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

practice  even  of  kings  and  presidents,  we 
should  reach  some  strange    conclusions.         « 

No  one  who  looks  into  this  subject  with- 
out the  prejudice  which  comes  from  an  un- 
conditional rejection  of  the  supernatural  as 
a  thing  that  cannot  be  established  by  any 
evidence,  will  fail  to  see  that  these  manu- 
script laws  are  the  most  uncertain  kind  of 
guess-work.  The  facts  are  to  the  theories 
as  three  grains  of  wheat  in  a  bushel  of 
chaff.  Certainly  these  very  uncertain  laws 
of  historical  criticism  should  have  no  weight 
in  the  mind  of  a  Christian  against  the  word 
of  Christ  and  His  Apostles,  by  whom  the 
historic  statements  of  the  Old  Testament 
are  confirmed.  Growth  cannot  be  put  in 
place  of  God  as  the  source  of  the  Bible. 
Israel's  religion  was  not  like  other  religions, 
a  Babel,  built  heavenward  by  men,  but  it 
is  a  Bethel  revelation  let  down  from 
Heaven.  It  was  great  at  the  very  first  be- 
cause it  was  from  God. 

Criticism  must  learn  to  reach  results  step 
by  step,  by  well-attested  facts    and  accurate 


Criticism   Tested  by  Logic.  75 

reasoning.  Nothing  less  will  persuade  the 
Christian  church  that  most  of  the  Penta- 
teuch's five  hundred  and  forty  references 
to  Moses  ®^  as  speaking,  acting,  writing, 
are  forgeries  with  which  Saint  Ezra  de- 
ceived Jesus  Christ.  Even  in  this  matter 
of  "  Biblical  Criticism,"  we  prefer  the 
positive  statement  of  the  divine  Christ  to 
the  learned  guesses  of  the  critics.  "  Lord, 
to  whom  shall  we  go  but  unto  Thee  ? 
Thou   hast   the   words   of   eternal   life," 


']6  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


VII. 

Did  Christ  abrogate  Old  Testament  Laws  ? 

Christ  quoted  Old  Testament  laiv  as  bind- 
ing in  its  principles  on  all  countries  and  all 
ages. 

Three  times  He  puts  -His  stamp  as  the 
King  of  a  new  dispensation  upon  the  Dec- 
alogue as  the  law  of  His  Kingdom  and  of 
the  world/^ 

Christ  also  quoted  other  principles  and 
precepts  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  a  lawyer 
or  officer  of  to-day  would  quote  unques- 
tioned law.®*  Three  times,  at  the  tempta- 
tion, He  said,  "It  is  written,"  by  way  of 
introducing  quotations  of  Old  Testament 
law  principles  from  Deuteronomy,  other 
than    those   of    the    Decalogue,    which    He 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  Laws.        yy 

used  ,as  binding  upon  all  beings  in  earth 
and  hell.  Since  Satan's  great  defeat  by  our 
Lord  in  the  wilderness  was  accomplished 
by  ammunition  from  Deuteronomy,  it  is  no 
wonder  he  is  stirring  up  strife  against  it. 
If  it  had  been  a  forgery,  the  devil  would 
have    shown    it    up   then. 

Christ  declared  that  the  whole  law  — 
meaning  the  Pentateuch  —  was  of  perpetual 
f orce  ^^  in  its  prineiples ;  of  course,  not  in 
its  superficial  and  incidental  details. 

It  has  been  said  by  opponents  of  the 
Old  Testament,  that  Christ  spoke  of  its 
laws  as  abrogated ;  but  it  will  be  observed 
by  those  who  carefully  read  Christ's 
words,  that  while  He  condemned  many 
laws  of  Jewish  tradition,  He  confirmed  the 
old  law  principles  of  the  Scriptures.  For 
instance,  Christ  cut  off  the  tradition, 
"Thou  shalt  hate  thine  enemy,"  which 
had  been  barnacled  on  to  the  Old  Testa- 
ment law,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neigh- 
bor." ^^  When  Christ  refers  to  the  Old 
Testament   it   is    usually   with    the    phrase, 


78  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

"It  is  written,"  or  "Have  ye  never 
read?"^'  —  quoting  each  passage  as  absolute 
law.  Christ's  references  to  the  old  laws, 
when  not  confirming  them,  were  chiefly  in 
opening  out  their  meaning,  as  a  thoughtful 
preacher  does  in  a  textual  sermon/^ 

Christ  did  indeed  indicate  that  some  of 
the  Old  Testament  laws  were  no  longer 
binding  in  the  letter,  since  they  were 
fulfilled  in  Himself,  or  outgrown  because 
of  the  people's  moral  advance.  *^  But  in 
the  New  Testament,  as  well  as  the  Old, 
there  are  such  temporary  precepts  that 
apply  only  to  certain  individuals  to  whom 
they  were  specially  addressed,  such  as 
Paul's  command  to  Timothy,  in  one  of  his 
epistles,  to  bring  his  cloak  from  Troas. 
In  this,  as  in  the  Old  Testament  precepts, 
which  have  no  longer  literal  application, 
there  is,  however,  a  kernel  of  profitable 
truth  for  all  ages.  That  request  of  Paul 
opens  up  suggestions  of  his  sufferings  for 
Christ  in  the  chilly  prison,  and  also  of 
the     importance     of     guarding     the     health 


CJnist  and  Old  Testament  Laws.        79 

when  in  Christian  work,  and  thus  has 
become    the    basis    of    inspiring    discourses. 

As  a  lawyer  keeps  numerous  volumes 
of  court  decisions  because  of  the  law 
principle  that  lies  under  the  incidental 
particulars  of  each  decision  as  its  kernel, 
so  all  the  law  passages  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment are  profitable  because  they  give  us 
a  volume  of  God's  decisions.  Looking 
below  the  names  of  Abraham,  Jacob,  and 
Daniel,  as  the  lawyer  looks  below  the 
names  of  Smith  and  Brown  and  Jones, 
who  were  engaged  in  a  law  case  a 
hundred  years  ago,  we  find,  as  does  the 
lawyer,  principles  of  equity,  glimpses  into 
the  eternal  laws  of  right,  which  are  much 
clearer  when  given  in  concrete  historical 
instances    than    in   abstract   form. 

We  cannot  agree  with  those  who  say 
"that  there  is  a  radical  difference  between 
the  Old  Testament  and  the  New  in  their 
ethical  standpoints,  that  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament being  exterior,  the  New,  interior; 
the    Old   Testament    dealing  with    conduct, 


8o  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

the  New  with  character ;  one  prescribing 
rules,  the  other  principles ;  the  first  regu- 
lating the  life,  the  second  breathing  into 
the  soul  a  new  spirit."'"  In  these  words 
truth  is  sacrificed  to  antithesis.  Moses 
most  emphatically  declared  that  obedience 
to  God's  law  required  not  only  external 
morality,  but  also  love,  —  "Thou  shalt  love 
the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thine  heart, 
with  all  thy  soul,  and  with  all  thy 
might"  ;'^^  and  the  key-texts  of  the  poetic 
books  of  the  Bible  are,  "  Create  in  me  a 
clean  heart,  and  renew  a  right  spirit 
within  me,"  and  "Thou  desirest  truth  in 
the   inward   parts." 

The  prominent  object  of  the  prophets 
is  to  show  that  religion  is  not  a  matter 
of  external  form,  but  of  character  and 
life. 

The  Old  Testament  as  well  as  the  New 
continually  puts  religion  into  these  three 
words,  —  Love,    Trust,    and    Obey. 

One  would  suppose  that  Christian  min- 
ister''^  who    said,    "The     law     did     not    tell 


Christ  and  Old  Testament  Lazvs.        8i 

the  young  man  that  he  must  love  the 
poor,  the  ignorant,  the  sinful,  following 
them  all  of  the  days  and  years  to  bless 
them ;  but  it  only  commanded  him  not  to 
kill  any  one,  or  cheat  any  one,  or  break 
the  Sabbath,"  had  never  read  the  five 
books  of  the  law  in  which  men  arc  com- 
manded to  love  God,  and  to  love  all  men 
as  their  neighbors,''^  and  to  treat  strangers'^''- 
of  other  nations  "as  those  born  in  .the 
land,"  and  to  leave  the  gleanings  of  the 
harvest  for  the  poor,  and  to  treat  with 
kindness   even   their   enemies. 

We  shall,  then,  find  it  profitable  to 
study  not  only  the  precepts  of  Christ,  but 
also  the  earliest  laws  that  came  from  the 
same  divine  Source,  as  containing  illustra- 
tions of  the  eternal  laws  of  our  Lord, 
Judge,  and  Father,  who  is  the  same  yes- 
terday,   to-day,    and   forever. 


82  Must  tJie  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


VIII. 

What   was  the   Teaching  of   Christ  in   re- 
gard TO  Old  Testament  Prophecies  and 

Imprecatory  Psalms  ? 

"  I  KNOW  of  no  one  passage  of  the  proph- 
ets which  can  certainly  be  said  to  point 
to  an  event  beyond  the  near  future  of  the 
writer."  So  said  an  "evangehcal"  (?)  pas- 
tor'^ recently  to  his  people.  This  Inger- 
sollism  masquerading  at  a  Christian  altar 
stands  in  decided  contrast  to  the  fact  that 
Christ  quoted  mimeroits  Old  Testament 
prophecies   as  fulfilled  in   Himself. 

He  said  of  Moses,  "  He  wrote  of  Me," 
and  of  the  entire  collection  of  Old  Testa- 
ment Scriptures,  "They  testify  of  Me." 
He  declared  that  the  prophecy  of  Malachi,'"^ 
in  regard  to  the  fore-runner  of  the  Mes- 
siah,   was    fulfilled    in    John    the    Baptist, 


CJirist  and  the  Imprecatory  Psalms.      ^^ 

ft 

and  the  prophecies  of  the  Messiah's  in- 
auguration in  the  beginning  of  His  own 
ministry."  He  quoted  Isaiah's  description 
of  the  Messiah's  miracles  as  a  description 
of  His  own."  He  explicitly  stated  at 
three  different  times  that  His  rejection  by 
the  Jews  had  been  declared  in  certain 
Old  Testament  prophecies,'^  and  twice  He 
spoke  of  His  betrayal  as  fulfilling  what 
had  been  foretold.^"  So  also  of  His  cruci- 
fixion.^^ The  Apostles,  who  still  further 
expressed  the  thought  and  feeling  of 
Christ,  declared  that  He  fulfilled  yet  other 
prophecies   in    His  life   and   resurrection. 

The  eleventh  chapter  of  Hebrews  sug- 
gests the  fact  that  one  of  the  threads  by 
which  the  Bible  is  bound  into  unity  is 
"faith,"  —  of  course  faith  in  its  relations 
to  Christ  the  Saviour,  which  is  distinctly 
ascribed  to  the  whole  line  of  godly  men, 
from  Abel  through  the  Old  Testament 
history. 

We  shall  find  it  profitable,  surely,  to 
read    the    Old    Testament    as    Christ    did, 


84  JMiist  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

and  as  He  opened  it  to  others,  to  find  in 
all  parts  of  it  the  things  concerning  Him- 
self.^' Indeed,  the  Christ  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament never  seems  to  be  understood  in  His  . 
atoning  zvork  except  by  those  zvho  have  tJior- 
oughly  stiidied  the  histoty  of  Christ  as  given 
in  advance  i7i  the  Old  Testariient,  zvJiere  He 
is  so  clearly  pictured  as  "  wounded  for  our 
transgressions  and  brnised  for  our  iniquities." 
Here  we  are  reminded  of  the  common 
mistake  among  the  most  orthodox  people, 
of  assuming-  that  the  Old  Testament  is 
wholly  or  chiefly  a  revelation  of  the  Father. 
It  would  be  far  more  correct  to  say,  God 
the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Spirit,  is  re- 
vealed in  every  part  of  the  Bible.  Every 
one  recognizes  the  numerous  references  to 
the  First  Person  of  the  Trinity  in  the 
Old  Testament.  Christ,  on  the  way  to 
Emmaus,  assures  us  that  if  we  are  not 
fools  and  slow  of  heart  to  believe  all  that 
the  prophets  have  spoken,  we  shall  find 
the  Old  Testament  also  full  of  references 
to   the   Son   of   God ;  and   the    Holy   Spirit 


Christ  and  the  Imprecatory  Psalms.      85 

is  hardly  less  prominent,  being  spoken  of 
as  having  a  part  in  creation/^  as  coming 
upon  heroes  to  inspire  them  to  action,^* 
upon  mechanics  to  direct  them  in  work/'' 
upon  prophets  to  aid  them  in  speech,^''  and 
into  the  hearts  of  the  humblest  be- 
lievers, who  pray  in  the  Old  Testament 
times,  "Take  not  Thy  Holy  Spirit  from 
me."" 

One  of  the  most  prominent  ^^  of  those 
who  think  the  Old  Testament  out  of  har- 
mony with  the  New,  says  that  in  the  for- 
mer, "  God  Himself  wore  garments,  and 
was  also  seated  on  a  throne,  and  held  a 
sceptre,  and  was  pictured  as  wheels  within 
wheels,  drawn  by  winged  creatures  from 
east  to  west."  The  same  perverting  of 
poetry  and  of  simile  might  be  applied  to 
the  New  Testament,  and  one  might  say 
that  God  was  represented  in  the  gospels 
as  a  "husbandman"  dealing  in  grapes,  as 
a  "merchant"  managing  business,  as  a 
"  king "  sitting  on  an  actual  throne  in  a 
city   of   golden    streets,    and   also  as  "made 


86  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

flesh,"  wearing  garments,  and  sharing  all 
the  sorrows  of  humanity.  In  both  Testa- 
ments the  Invisible  God  is  poetically  rep- 
resented by  figures  and  similes,  and  in 
both  Testaments  the  Son  of  God  visibly 
appears  to  men  in  a  form  like  themselves ; 
all  such  passages,  in  the  Old  Testament 
as  well  as  in  the  New,  affording  no  diffi- 
culty in  the  light  of  that  passage,  *'  No 
man  hath  seen  God  at  any  time ;  the  only- 
begotten  Son,  who  is  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Father,  He  hath  declared  Him." 

Christ  quoted  other  Old  Testament  prophe- 
cies besides  those  of  the  Messiah,  as  sure  of 
fiilfiUment.  For  instance,  the  prophecy  of 
the  destruction  of   Jerusalem.^^ 

Christ  interpreted  some  of  the  imprecatory 
Psalms  as  having  a  symbolic  reference  to  the 
enemies  of  the  Messiah.  The  109th  Psalm 
is  universally  considered  the  most  severe 
of  David's  imprecations,  and  two  verses  of 
this  are  specifically  mentioned  by  Christ  as 
prophetic  of  Judas.®"  It  should  lead  every 
one    who    really    accepts    the    authority   of 


Christ  and  the  Imprecatory  Psalms.      B>y 

Christ  to  a  re-examination  of  the  impreca- 
tory Psalms,  if  he  has  decided  against  them, 
to  know  that  Christ  had  all  these  Psalms 
before  Him  in  the  prayer-book  and  hymn- 
book  which  he  was  constantly  using ;  that 
He  made  no  unfavorable  references  to  them, 
and  quoted  from  them  at  least  twice  in  His 
recorded  discourses  as  having  a  spiritual 
bearing  upon  His  own  life  and  sufferings. 
In  reading  them,  one  should  also  remem- 
ber that  they  are  poetry  and  not  prose,  and 
are  no  more  to  be  literally  interpreted  than 
Shakespeare's  words  in  regard  to  a  great 
villain,  — 

"  Put  in  every  honest  hand  a  whip, 
To  lash  the  rascal  naked  through  the  world." 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  they 
were  written  by  a  man  who  was  taunted 
with  the  words,  "Thou  lovest  thine  ene- 
mies "  ;  who  cut  off  Saul's  robe  when  he 
might  have  cut  off  his  head ;  who  spared 
Shimei's  life  against  the  wish  of  his  gen- 
erals,   when   the   former   was   insulting    the 


88  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

king  by  calling  him  a  murderer  and  adul- 
terer ;  and  who  sincerely  mourned  the  death 
of  his  bitterest  enemies  and  punished  their 
murderers.^^  What  an  imprecatory  (?)  psalm 
was  that  which  he  sang  at  the  death  of 
his   bitterest   enemy,    Saul,  — 

Saul  and  Jonathan  were  lovely  and  pleasant  in  their 
lives, 

And  in  their  death  they  were  not  divided: 

They  were  swifter  than  eagles,  they  were  stronger 
than  lions. 

Ye  daughters  of  Israel,  weep  over  Saul,  who  clothed 
you  in  scarlet,  with  other  delights, 

Who  put  on  ornaments  of  gold  upon  your  apparel. 

How  are  the  mighty  fallen  in  the  midst  of  the  battle ! 

It  should  be  remembered,  further,  that 
even  the  New  Testament  commands  those 
who  love  the  Lord  to  hate  evil ;  so  that 
David's  hatred  of  wrong,  as  expressed  in 
the  Psalms,  has  no  unchristlike  character, 
if  the  thought  of  personal  hostility  is  sep- 
arated from  it.  It  should  be  remembered, 
further,  that  the  23d  chapter  of  Matthew, 
from  the  lips  of  Christ,  considering  that  it 


Christ  and  the  Imprecatory  Psalms.      89 

is  prose,  while  David's  Psalms  are  Oriental 
poetry,  is  as  severe  as  any  of  them,  de- 
nouncing as  it  does  the  Scribes  and  Phari- 
sees as  "hypocrites,"  "serpents,  "vipers," 
"whited  sepulchres,"  and  "children  of  the 
devil,  who  shall  not  escape  the  damnation 
of  hell."  ®^  These  words  were  uttered  by 
Christ  against  men  who  were  His  "  per- 
sonal enemies,"  and  were  constantly  con- 
spiring to  destroy  Him.  We  read  them, 
however,  as  we  should,  rejecting  the  thought 
that  they  could  have  been  the  utterance 
of  personal  hostility.  Read  David's  Psalms 
in  the  same  way.  It  has  been  suggested 
that  these  "woes"  of  Christ  should  be 
read  not  bitterly  but  with  a  tone  of  tender 
reproach.  Let  David's  like  imprecations  be 
read  in  the  same  tone. 

The  imprecatory  Psalms  which  Christ  read 
in  his  Bible,  we  believe  are  "profitable" 
for  Christians  to-day,  when  there  is  so  much 
of  criminal  leniency  both  in  the  judgment 
of  the  courts  and  of  the  people  toward 
unrighteousness  and  v/ickedness.     The  man 


90  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

has  lived  a  very  dull  life  who  has  not, 
when  reading  of  some  peculiarly  atrocious 
crime,  without  any  personal  feeling,  uttered 
that  modern  imprecatory  psalm,  "  Hanging 
is  too  good  for  him,"  —  the  indignation  of 
a  soul  in  proportion  to  its  purity,  not  to- 
ward a  personal  enemy,  but  toward  wrong. 
Who,  in  reading  the  history  of  the 
Waldenses,  betrayed,  executed,  robbed, 
murdered  by  thousands  by  the  savage  Ro- 
manists, has  not  entered  into  the  spirit  of 
Milton's  imprecatory  psalm,  "Avenge,  O 
Lord,  thy  slaughtered  saints "  ?  Joseph 
Cook  tells  of  a  liberal  Christian  who  ut- 
terly condemned  the  imprecatory  Psalms  as 
unfit  to  be  read ;  but  when  this  patriot 
heard,  at  the  opening  of  the  war,  that 
Baltimore,  after  the  attack  on  our  soldiers, 
was  to  be  fired  upon,  he  quickly  and  ear- 
nestly exclaimed,  "I'm  glad  of  it."  "So 
am  I,"  said  an  orthodox  preacher  by  his 
side,  "  only  I  was  afraid  to  say  so  lest 
you  should  think  I  was  uttering  an  impre- 
catory psalm." 


Christ  and  the  Imptecatory  Psalms.      91 

Abraham  Lincoln,  in  a  letter  written  Dec. 
II,  1864,  said:  "You  say  you  are  praying 
for  the  war  to  end.  So  am  I,  but  I  want 
it  to  end  right.  God  alone  knows  how  anx- 
ious I  am  to  see  these  rivers  of  blood  cease 
to  flow ;  but  they  must  flow  until  Trcasoji 
Jades  its  head''  What  if  David  had  ut- 
tered the  same  sentiments  in  poetry } 


92  Must  tJie  Old  Testament  Go  ? 


IX. 

Are  God's  Tenderness  and  Man's  Immortality 
Revealed  in  the  Old  Testament  ? 

Christ  reaffirmed  the  rigJiteous  %var7iijigs 
of  the  Old  Testamejit  against  sin.  It  is 
frequently  said  by  Bible  students,  within 
and  without  the  evangelical  church,  that 
the  God  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the 
New  are  not  alike,  —  the  one  being  a 
severe  Monarch,  and  the  other  a  loving 
Father.  Such  expressions  as  this  are 
representative :  "  In  the  Old  Testament 
God  is  a  King;  in  the  New  Testament 
the  King  is  revealed  as  a  Father.""^ 
"Between  the  God  of  the  ancient  Jewish 
theocracy  and  the  God  of  the  New  theoc- 
racy established  by  Jesus,  there  exists  in 
general  the  broadest  and  most  funda- 
mental    diversity.     In     the     one     case     wc 


God' s  Tenderness  and  Maris  Immortality.  93 

have  the  Lord  God  bringing  up  a  special 
people  out  of  Egypt ;  in  the  other  we 
have  a  Father  in  Heaven  sending  the 
gospel  to  every  nation  in  the  world.  In 
the  one  case  we  have  a  jealous  God  visit- 
ing the  iniquities  of  the  fathers  upon  the 
children,  to  the  third  and  fourth  genera- 
tion of  them  that  hate  him ;  in  the  other 
we  have  a  benign  Father  'who  maketh 
His  sun  to  rise  on  the  evil  and  the  good, 
and  sendeth  His  rain  on  the  just  and 
the  unjust';  so  that  the  very  theism  of 
Jesus  versus  that  of  the  ancient  Jewish 
Scriptures  is,  in  many  most  important 
particulars,  of  another  realm  and  order."** 
These  conclusions  are  reached  by  a  one- 
sided view  of  each  Testament,  seeking  out 
only  the  references  to  the  tender  side  of 
God  in  the  New  Testament,  and  only  the 
revelation  of  God's  justice  in  the  Old. 
The  fallacy  of  such  reasoning  will  readily 
appear  by  applying  the  same  plan  in  an 
exactly  opposite  manner,  taking  the  pas- 
sages  referring    to    the   severity  of    God  in 


94  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

the  New  Testament  and  contrasting  them 
with  those  referring  to  his  tenderness  in 
the    Old.    ■ 

We  open  the  New  Testament  and  find 
that  Matthew  has  more  passages  about 
judgment  and  punishment  than  any  other 
book  of  the  Bible.  A  tax-collector  was 
inspired  to  write  it  as  The  Book  of  God's 
Reckonings  with  men  in  rewards  and 
punishments.^^  In  it  "woe  unto  you" 
occurs  fourteen  times,  "judgment"  eight, 
"hell"  eight,  "fire"  (referring  to  future 
punishment)  four  times,  besides  frequent 
use  of  such  epithets  toward  the  ungodly 
as  "hypocrites,"  "vipers,"  "serpents," 
"dogs,"  "swine,"  "ravening  wolves," 
"false  prophets,"  "wicked  and  adulterous 
generation."  In  addition  to  these  elements 
of  severity,  —  all  of  them  connected  with 
God  in  Christ,  —  we  find  Him  saying  to 
Peter,  "Get  thee  behind  Me,  Satan" ; 
also  using  a  whip  of  small  cords  to  drive 
the  traders  out  of  the  temple,  which  He 
declares     they     have     made     a     "den    of 


God^s  Tendeiiiess  and  Mail  s  Immortality.  95 

thieves'' ;  cursing  a  fruitless  fig-tree;  call- 
ing the  Pharisees  "children  of  hell,"  "fools 
and  blind,"  "liars  and  murderers,"  like 
"their  father,  the  devil";®®  proclaiming  as 
the  punishment  of  unrighteousness  "outer 
darkness,  where  there  is  weeping  and 
gnashing  of  teeth  —  where  the  worm  dieth 
not,  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched."  It  is 
also  in  the  New  Testament  that  God 
declared  through  Christ,  "Whosoever  shall 
fall  on  this  rock  shall  be  broken ;  on  whom 
soever  it  shall  fall,  it  shall  grind  him  to 
powder."  And  as  for  God's  being  revealed 
as  a  Judge  and  a  King  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment and  not  in  the  New,  it  is  in  Revela- 
tion, more  than  in  any  other  part  of  the 
Bible,  that  God's  judgeship  and  kingship 
and  punishment  of  the  wicked  are  pictured, 
in  connection  with  the  great  white  throne. 
In  contrast  with  this  severity  of  the  God 
of  the  New  Testament,  the  Old  Testa- 
ment represents  God  as  Our  Father  more 
than  a  score  of  times:®''  "The  Lord  thy 
God   bare   thee    as    a    man    doth   bare    his 


g6  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

son,"  "Doubtless,  Thou  art  our  Father, 
though  Abraham  be  ignorant  of  us," 
"Like  as  a  father  pitieth  his  children,  so 
the  Lord  pitieth  them  that  fear  Him," 
"  Have  we  not  all  one  Father ;  hath  not 
one  God  created  us  ?  Why  do  we  deal 
treacherously  every  man  against  his  broth- 
er?" "He  shall  cry  unto  Him,  'Thou  art 
my  Father,  my  God,  the  Rock  of  my  Sal- 
vation,'"  "Thou,  O  Lord,  art  our  Father, 
our    Redeemer." 

But  with  a  depth  of  tenderness  still 
more  remarkable,  the  Old  Testament  also 
compares  God  to  a  Mother — "As  one 
whom  his  mother  comforteth,  so  will  I 
comfort  you,"  "The  mother  may  forget 
her  child,  but  God  will  not  forget," 
"  When  my  father  and  my  mother  forsake 
me,  then  the  Lord  will  take  me  up,"  "In 
Thee  the  orphan  people  find  mercy,"  "As 
an  eagle  stirreth  up  her  nest,  fluttereth 
over  her  young,  spreadeth  abroad  her 
wings,  taketh  them,  beareth  them  on  her 
vv^ings,  so  the  Lord  alone  did  lead  him." 


God's  Tenderness  and  Man  s  Immortality.  97 


It  was  not  the  New  Testament,  but  the 
Old,  that  first  declared,  "  The  Lord  thy 
God   loved  thee."^* 

These  passages  sufficiently  indicate  the 
incorrectness  of  the  frequent  statement 
about  the  character  of  God,  as  revealed 
in  the  two  Testaments,  being  exclusively 
severe  in  the  one  and  exclusively  tender 
in  the  other.  In  both  of  them  "Behold 
the   goodness    and   severity   of   God."^^ 

Hiram  Powers,  familiarly  describing  the 
process  of  his  own  mind  in  fashioning  his 
celebrated  bust  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth,  re- 
marked that  his  great  trouble  had  been 
found  in  giving  the  proper  expression  to 
the  countenance.  "  How  could  I  put  into 
the  same  marble  face,"  he  asked,  "the 
look  of  Him  who  pitied  the  sick  and  the 
afflicted,  who  encouraged  those  of  feeble 
mind  in  their  faith,  and  who  pardoned  the 
penitent,  together  with  the  look  of  Him  who 
uttered  such  terrible  threats  of  woe  against 
the  hypocritical  Pharisees  in  the  23d  chap- 
ter of  Matthew  and  the  nth  of  Luke.''" 


98  Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

In  the  same  chapter  where  Christ  says, 
"Woe  unto  thee,  Chorazin,"  He  also  says, 
"  Come  unto  me,  all  ye  that  labor  and  are 
heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give  you  rest."^"** 
In  the  same  chapter  where  Christ  says  to 
the  Pharisees,  "O  generation  of  vipers," 
He  says  also  to  sincere  and  penitent  souls, 
"  A  bruised  reed  shall  He  not  break,  and 
tLe  smoking  flax  shall  He  not  quench."  ^°^ 
In  that  most  •  severe  chapter  of  the  Bible, 
the  23d  of  Matthew,  in  which  the  Phari- 
sees are  called  hypocrites,  serpents,  and 
vipers,  Jesus  utters,  amid  his  tears,  those 
words  of  unspeakable  compassion :  "  O 
Jerusalem,  thou  that  killest  the  prophets 
and  stonest  them  that  were  sent  unto 
thee ;  how  often  would  I  have  gathered 
thee,  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  brood  under 
her   wings,    and   ye   would    not ! " 

In  the  same  Old  Testament  chapter 
that  God  is  described  as  bearing  Israel  as 
a  father  bears  his  son,  we  are  also  told 
of  God's  anger  toward  sin/°^  In  the 
same   chapter   of    the   Old    Testament   that 


Goers  Tenderness  and  Mart's  Immortality.  C)C) 

we  read  the  words,  "The  Lord  thy  God 
is  a  consuming  fire,"  we  read  in  another 
verse  the  statement,  "The  Lord  thy  God 
is  a  merciful  God.""^ 

The  revelation  of  God's  character  in  the 
New  Testament  and  in  the  Old  is  con- 
cisely expressed,  in  its  tenderness  and  se- 
verity, in  that  Old  Testament  verse  :  "  And 
the  Lord  passed  before  him  and  proclaimed, 
The  Lord,  The  Lord  Qo^,  merciful  and  gra- 
cious, long-suffering,  and  abundant  in  good- 
ness and  truth,  keeping  mercy  for  thou- 
sands, forgiving  iniquity  and  transgression 
and  sin,  and  that  will  by  no  means  clear 
the   guilty."  ^°* 

The  Old  Testament  as  well  as  the  New, 
then,  is  profitable  for  the  disciples  of  Christ, 
as  it  was  for  the  Master  Himself,  as  a  rev- 
elation of  both  the  love  and  justice  of  God. 

Christ  declared  that  immortality  was 
revealed  in  the  Old  Testament,  as  He 
expounded  the  signification  of  the  words,  "I 
am  the  God  of  Abraham,  of  Isaac,  and  of 
Jacob,"  which  He  intimated  was  an  indirect 


100        Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

statement  of  immortality;  "for  God,"  He 
said,  "is  not  a  God  of  the  dead,  but  of  the 
living."^"*  When  God  called  Himself  the 
God  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob  after 
they  had  died  and  left  the  earth.  He  was 
reminding  men  that  Abraham,  Isaac,  and 
Jacob  were  still  living  in  another  sphere. 

"Jesus  said,  as  the  Revisionists  render  it, 
'  Ye  search  the  Scriptures,  for  in  them 
ye  think  ye  have  eternal  life,  and  they  are 
they  which  testify  of  Me.'"^  Whether  the 
verb  'search'  be  used  in  the  indicative  or 
the  imperative  mode,  evidently  Christ  ap- 
proved of  searching  the  Scriptures,  —  then 
only  the  Old  Testament,  —  and  also  approved 
of  the  idea  that  in  tJiern  was  evidence  of 
^eternal  life.'  Since  Christ  approved  of 
finding  evidence  of  eternal  life  in  the  Old 
Testament,  shall  not   we?"^"'' 

"  The  language  of  the  Old  Testament 
always  presupposes  immortality.  The  trans- 
lation of  Enoch,  the  'gathering  to  his 
people'  of  each  of  the  dying  patriarchs, 
and   all   such   allusions   in    the    Pentateuch, 


God's  Tenderness  and  Man  s  hninortality.  lOI 

plainly  refer  to  the  then  universal  belief  in 
the  spiritual  world.  They  are  otherwise 
inexplicable.  The  expressions  of  the  very 
ancient  Book  of  Job,  as  well  as  of  David 
and  the  prophets,  show  that  they  looked 
forward  to  a  future  life  of  blessedness  and 
glory;  'fullness  of  joy,'  'pleasures  forever- 
more,'  'righteousness,'  'satisfaction,'  'ever- 
lasting life,'  'everlasting  joy,'  and  similar 
expressions,"^  show  their  ideas  of  the  life 
after  death."  "^ 

Those  who  do  not  believe  that  immortal- 
ity is  revealed  or  recognized  in  the  Old 
Testament  have  a  problem  to  solve  in  the 
fact  that  the  catechism""  of  the  Jews, 
who  accept  only  the  Old  Testament  part 
of  the  Bible,  declares  that  the  three  fun- 
damental principles  of  Judaism  are  "God, 
Eternal  Life,  Revelation."  Among  other 
proof-texts  of  immortality  from  the  Old 
Testament,  the  following  are  cited  from 
the  Jews'  English  version  of  the  Bible : 
"O  give  thanks  unto  the  Lord  for  He  is 
good ;    for    to    Eternity   enduretJi   His    kind- 


I02        Must  the  Old  Testament  Go? 

ness."^^^  '^Surely  tliere  is  a  future  state, 
and  tJiy  expectation  shall  not  be  cut  off."^^^ 
Many  other  passages  are  also  quoted."* 
But  the  question  whether  immortahty  was 
revealed  and  recognized  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment has  been  definitely  settled  by  a 
higher  authority  than  the  Jews,  —  by  the 
specific  and  inspired  statement  in  Heb. 
II  :  9,  1 6,  that  Abraham  "sought  for  a  city 
that  hath  foundations  whose  maker  and 
builder  is  God,"  and  that  others  of  the 
patriarchs  and  heroes  of  earlier  times,  by 
their  lives,  "declared  plainly  that  they 
sought  the  better  country,  that  is,  a 
heavenly." 

This  suggests  to  us,  that,  in  order  to 
profitably  study  the  Old  Testament,  we 
are  to  recognize,  that  while  every  element 
of  Bible  truth  was  revealed  in  the  Old 
Testament,  it  was  much  more  fully  re- 
vealed in  the  New,  the  Bible  being  like 
a  tree  which  has,  in  its  earliest  stage  as 
a  sapling,  all  the  elements  which  it  has 
afterwards    in    full    maturity, — the    growth 


God's  Tenderness  and  Mali s  Immortality.   103 

being  in  the  increase  of  elements  already 
possessed,  not  in  the  introduction  of  new- 
ones/"  This  characteristic  of  the  Bible 
may  be  illustrated  by  the  horizontal 
section  of  a  tree,  showing  the  rings  of 
its  successive  growth,  and  the  expansion 
of  each  part  of  its  circumference  with 
every  added  year.  We  find  at  the  very 
beginning  of  the  Bible's  organism  God 
revealed  as  a  Father,  but  more  and  more 
so  to  the  end  of  the  New  Testament. 
So  the  thought  of  God  as  a  Shepherd 
of  His  people ;  as  the  vine  which  gives 
life  to  His  people,  the  branches ;  as  Light 
to  banish  the  darkness  of  sin ;  as  King 
of  all ;  as  the  Lord  of  Nature ;  as  the 
Judge  of  all ;  as  the  Bridegroom  of  the 
church;  as  a  Bleeding  Lamb  for  sacrifice; 
as  the  Holy  Spirit ;  as  the  Bread  of  Life ; 
as  the  Water  of  Life.  All  these  lines  of 
truth  are  found  in  the  Bible  in  its 
earliest  Old  Testament  pages  as  in  the 
heart  of  a  tree,  but  expanding  like  the 
increasing    circumference    of    a    tree,    with 


1 04        Miist  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

the  added  growth  of  psalms,  prophets, 
gospels,  epistles.  Christ  reproved  Nicode- 
mus,  because  as  a  master  in  Israel  he 
knew  not  from  his  Old  Testament  the 
truths  of  the  new  birth  and  redemption 
through  faith  in  the  Crucified.  "*  In  order 
to  understand  fully  any  one  of  these  lines 
of  thought  that  go  through  the  whole 
Bible,  we  need  to  study  its  beginnings  in 
the  Old  Testament,  as  well  as  its  later 
developments  in  the  New.  So  clearly 
does  the  Old  Testament  state  the  leading 
spiritual  truths  which  are  more  fully  re- 
vealed in  the  New,  that  certain  Psalms 
are  called  by  Luther  "Pauline,"  because 
of  their  clear  statements  of  justification 
by  faith;  and  Isaiah  was  called  by  the 
church  fathers  "the  Evangelical  prophet," 
because,  with  a  fullness  like  that  of  Luke 
or  John,  he  described  the  life  and  death 
of    Christ    as    our    Saviour. 

The  spiritual  life  of  the  Church,  from 
the  days  of  Christ  to  the  present,  affords 
abundant  evidence  that  a  study  of  God  and 


God 's  Tenderness  and  Mans  Immortality.  1 05 

Christ,  and  the  Spirit,  and  sin,  and  salva- 
tion, in  the  Old  Testament,  is  "profitable 
for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for 
instruction  in  righteousness."  This  expres- 
sion, as  I  have  intimated,  might  be  ren- 
dered more  strongly :  "  Every  Scripture  is 
God-inspired,  and  therefore  profitable  for 
conviction,  for  conversion,  for  Christian 
culture ; "  and  if  we  take  this  key  which 
God  has  sent  to  us  through  Paul,  as  we 
enter  the  chambers  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  over  every  passage  ask,  as  if  we  turned 
a  key,  "  How  is  this  profitable  for  me  or 
for  others  for  conviction  of  sin?"  "How 
is  this  profitable  for  me  or  for  others  for 
conversion  or  for  Christian  culture  ? "  we 
shall  find  unexpected  treasures  and  hidden 
glories  in  the  most  unpromising  chapters. 

That  is  the  meaning,  in  part,  of  Christ's 
words,  "  I  have  many  things  to  say  unto 
you,  but  ye  cannot  bear  them  now."  As 
we  are  able  to  bear  it  the  Bible  says  more 
and  more  to  us  from  its  depths  of  meaning. 
That   explains   all   true  "progress   in   theol- 


1 06        Must  the  Old  Testament  Go  ? 

ogy."  There  is  more  light  yet  to  break 
forth  from  God's  Word.  In  the  language 
of  Daniel  Webster,  himself  so  familiar  with 
the  Bible  that  he  was  called  "  the  walking 
concordance  of  the  United  States  Senate," 
"There   is   more  of  valuable  truth  yet 

TO  BE  GLEANED  FROM  THE  SaCRED  WRIT- 
INGS THAT  .HAS  THUS  FAR  ESCAPED  THE 
ATTENTION  OF  COMMENTATORS,  THAN  FROM 
ALL  OTHER  SOURCES  OF  HUMAN  KNOWLEDGE 
COMBINED." 

"  We  'search  the  world  for  truth ;  we  cull 
The  good,  the  pure,  the  beautiful 
From  graven  stone  and  written  scroll, 
From  all  old  flower-fields  of  the  soul ; 
And,  weary  seekers  of  the  best. 
We  come  back  laden  from  our-^quest. 
To  find  that  all  the  sages  said 
Is  in  the  Book  our  mothers  read."?!!" 


APPENDIX  OF  NOTES. 


APPENDIX  OF  NOTES. 


1.  Rev.  Mr.  Spencer,  Unitarian.  —  2.  Augustus  Blauvelt, 
expelled  from  the  Reformed  Church  for  errors  of  doctrine. 
—  3.  The  Christian  Union.  —  4.  Prof.  Hermann  Strack,  of 
Berlin.  5.  Prof.  W.  Robertson  Smith.  [Rev.  R.  Heber 
Newton  quotes  Mr.  Moody  also  as  saying :  "  I  know  that 
the  Bible  is  inspired,  because  it  'inspires'  me."  But  Mr. 
Moody  would  be  far  from  making  that  the  final  test  of  the 
inspiration  of  the  va7-ioics  parts  of  the  Bible,  and  ignoring 
the  objective  authority  of  the  word.]  —  6.  See  also  i  Cor. 
10 :  II,  where  the  Old  Testament  Histories  are  declared  to 
be  God's  teaching  by  examples,  the  deeds  as  well  as  the 
records  being  the  handwriting  of  God.  —  7.  Edward  Reuss, 
one  of  the  most  influential  of  the  Biblical  critics,  says  that 
in  1834  he  discovered  by  "intuition"  that  the  elaborate  laws 
in  the  middle  books  of  the  Pentateuch  must  have  been 
made  at  a  later  age  than  the  simpler  ones  of  Deuteronomy, 
according  to  the  principles  of  evolution.  —  8.  Most  of  the 
destructive  critics  of  the  Old  Testament  have  begun  their 
investigations  with  a  strong  prejudice  against  the  supernat- 
ural and  in  favor  of  evolution.  To  the  latter  fact  Professor 
Curtis  testifies.  Hermann  Strack  calls  attention  to  the 
former  as  especially  strong  in  Wellhausen.  —  9.  R.  Heber 
Newton,  in  his  "  Wrong  Uses  of  the  Bible."  — 10.  Jas.  2  : 
21.  —  11.    Mat.     12:40-42.  — 12.    Hermann    Strack   also 


no  Appendix  of  Notes. 


asserts  without  proof  that  "The  object  of  the  book  is  not 
to  give  actual  history."  The  farsight  and  insight  of  these 
critics  into  the  "object"  of  the  writer  of  the  book  of  Jonah, 
and  of  Christ  in  quoting  it,  are  especially  remarkable,  be- 
cause these  men  believe  in  science,  but  not  in  seers.  — 13. 
Delitzsch.  — 14.  W.  H.  H.  Murray,  whose  statements  on 
this  point  were  strongly  endorsed  by  Professor  Swing.  — 
15.  Richter.  — 16.  Rev.  3  :  20.  — 17.  Luke  17:3;  14:8; 
Mat.  24  :  15,  etc. 

WHAT  CHRIST  SAID  OF  THE  OLD  TESTAMENT  IN  THE  NEW. 
\_Frojn  '■'■New  Testament  Helps,'"  by  Rev.  IV.  F.  Crafts.'\ 

I.  Quoted  from  itearly  all  its  books.     (See  references  below.) 

II.  His  references  to  Old  Testament  history:  Eden,  Mat. 
19:4;  Abel,  Mat.  23  :  35 ;  Noah,  Mat.  24  :  37  ;  Lu.  17  :  27 ; 
Abraham,  John  8  :  56 ;  Lot,  Sodom,  etc.,  Lu.  17  :  29-32; 
Moses,  burning  bush,  etc.,  Mark  12  :  26;  the  manna,  John 
6  :  31  ;  brazen  serpent,  John  3  :  14;  David,  Mat.  12  :  3,4,5; 
Queen  of  Sheba,  Maf.  12  :  42 ;  Elijah,  Lu.  4  :  25,  26;  Eli- 
sha,  Naaman,  etc.,  Lu.  4  :  27 ;  Jonah,  Mat.  12  :  40-42. 

IIL  His  references  to  Old  Testatnent  laws :  The  decalogue, 
Mat.  4:10;  15:4;  19:18,19;  22  :  37-39;  Mark  12  :  29, 
30;  Lu.  10  :  25-28.  Other  references  to  O.  T.  laws.  Mat. 
5  :  17-19;  21  :  16.  Comments  on  0._  T.  laws.  Mat.  5  :  21- 
27.  Outgrown  laws,  Mat.  5  :  31-38.  Separating  O.  T.  laws 
from  Jewish  traditions,  Mat.  5  :  43. 

IV.  His  rcferejtces  to  Old  Testament  prophecies  of  the  Mes- 
siah. In  general :  Mat.  22  :  44  ;  John  5  :  39-46 ;  Lu.  24  : 
27-44.  The  forerunner,  Mat.  11  :  10,  13,  14.  Inauguration 
of  ministry,  Lu.  4  :  17.  Miracles,  Mat.  11:5.  Rejection, 
Mat.  13  :  14;  21  :  42  ;  John  15  :  25.  Betrayal,  John  13  :  18; 
17  :  12.     Crucifixion,  John  19  :  28. 

V.  His  references  to  other  O.  T.  prophecies :  Destruction 
of  Jerusalem,  Mat.  24  :  15-31. 


Appendix  of  Notes.  1 1 1 


VI.  His  references  to  some  of  the  imprecatory  Psalms :  John 
13  :  iS;    17  :  12. 

VII.  O.  T.  warnings  repeated :     Mark  9  :  44;  Mat.  7  :  23  ; 

IS  •  7-9- 

VIII.  His  reference  to  immortality  as  implied  in  O.  T.  Ian- 
guage:     Mat.  22  :  31,  32.     (See  also  Heb.  11  :  10-16.) 

[This  table  includes  the  most  prominent  references  of 
Christ  to  Old  Testament  passages.  The  entire  list  may  be 
studied  by  reading  all  the  te.xts  marked  "  C  "  in  the  list  of 
"  References  in  the  New  Testament  to  passages  in  the  Old 
Testament,"  in  "New  Testament  Helps."] 

18.  Isa.  57  :  15  ;  62  :  2  ;  Psa.  21  :  17. — 19.  Psa.  145  :  19 ; 
Isa.  65  :  13. — 20.  Psa.  41  :  i,  2,  4 ;  34  :  14. — 21.  Exod.  23  : 
4,  5 ;  Prov.  20  :  22  ;  25  :  21. — 22.  Exod.  23  :  4,  5 ;  Prov.  20  : 
22;  25:21. —  23.  Rabbi  Hillel  also  learned  it  there.  He 
said,  as  quoted  in  the  Jewish  Catechism  :  "  What  you  do 
not  wish  done  to  you,  do  not  to  others ;  upon  this  rests  the 
whole  Thorah."—  Talmud  20  Sabbath,  F.  31.— 24.  Mat.  5  : 
22,  28.— 25.  Mat.  6  :  18;  Isa.  58  :  5.-26.  Mat.  6  :  26;  Job 
38  :  41  ;  Psa.  147  :  9;  Deu.  25  :  4. —  27.  Psa.  80  :  8-19;  Isa. 
5  :  1-7.— 28.  John  10.— 29.  Gen.  49  :  24.— 30.  Psa.  23.— 
31.   Isa.  40  :  II. — 32.   Isa.  62  :  5,  etc. —  33.    Isa.  54  :  5. — 

34.  Psa.  45. 

35.  Aspects  of  Truth  common  to  both  Testaments 
—  introduced     in     the    Old,   and  more    fully 

DESCRIBED    IN   THE   NEW. 

[From  "New  Testament  Helps,"  by  IV.  F.  Crafts.'\ 
[Only   partial  lists  of  passages  —  enough   to  show  that 
each  line  of  thought  referred  to  is  found  —  with  more  or 
less  of  emphasis,  in  every  part  of  the  Bible.     Spaces  left 
for  additional  passages  to  be  noted.] 

God  as  "Father."  Deu.  i  :  31  ;  32:  11 ;  2  Chr.  29  :  10; 
Is.  63  :  16;  Mat.  6  :  9;   2  Thes.  2  :  16. 


112  Appendix  of  Notes. 


God  as  "King."  Gen.  14  :  i8;  i  Sa.  12  :  12;  Ps.  2  :  6, 
10,  16;  Is.  6  :  5;  43  :  15  ;  Dan.  4  :  17,  37;  Zee.  14  :  9;  Mat. 
13;  Lu.  19  :  38;  John  18  :  37;  Rom.  14  :  17;  Rev.  11  :  15 ; 
12  :  10;  15:3;  17  :  14- 

God  as  "  Shepherd."  Gen.  49  :  24;  Ezr.  34  :  23;  Ps. 
23  :  I ;  80  :  I ;  Is.  40  :  1 1 ;  Ezek.  36  :  38 ;  Zee.  13:7;  John 
10  :  14;  21  :  15;  Heb.  13  :  20;  i  Pe.  2  :  25;  5:4. 

God  as  "Bridegroom."  2  Cor.  11  :  3;  Is. 62  :  5;  Mat. 
9:15;  John  3  :  29;  Rev.  21  :  2,  9;  22  :  17. 

God  AS  "Judge."  Gen.  18:25;  I^^u.  32:36;  Judg. 
11:27;  I  Sa.  2:10;  Job  9:15;  Ps.  7  :  II ;  68  :  5 ;  John 
5  :  30 ;  Ac.  10  :  42 ;    2  Ti.  4  :  8. 

God  AS  "  Light."  Ex.  10:23;  14:20;  2  Sa.  23:4; 
Ps.  27  :  I ;  Is.  9:2;  Zee.  14:7;  Hos.  6:5;  Hab.  3:4; 
Lu.  2  :  32;  John  i  :  4;  9  :  5;  Ac.  22  :  6;  Rom.  2  :  19;  i  Jo. 
1:5;  Rev.  21  :  23;  22  :  5. 

God  AS  Vine  "Life."  Gen.  49  :  11 ;  Ps.  80  :  9-19;  Is. 
5  :  1-7;  Lu.  13  :  6;  John  15  :  i,  etc.;  Ep.  5  :  22,  23;  Rev. 
2:7. 

God  AS  Bleeding  "Lamb."  Gen.  4:4;  Rev.  13:8; 
Ex.  12  :  3,  etc. ;  Lev.  14:12;  Num.  28:3;  Deu.  16:2; 
Josh.  5:10;  Judg.  2:5;  I  Sa.  7:9;  Ps.  51:16;  Pro. 
21  :  23 ;  Is.  I  :  II ;  53  :  7 ;  Jer.  6  :  20  [John  3  :  10].  "  Paul- 
ine Psalms,"  32,  51,  etc.  "Evangelical  Prophet,"  Isaiah, 
John  I  :  29;  Ac.  6  :  32  ;  Rev.  5  :  12,  13  [27  references  to 
the  "Lamb "in  Rev.]. 

God  AS  THE  "  Lord  of  Nature."  Gen.  1:1;  Ps. 
19  :  I ;  104  ;  Job  38  :  4-7  ;  Is.  40  :  12-31 ;  Jer.  10  :  10-16; 
Mark  4  :  39-41 ;  John  i  :  1-5;  Col.  i  :  16,  17 ;  Heb.  i  :  10- 
12;  Rev.  4  :  II. 

God's  Spirit  as  "Water  of  Life."  i  Cor.  10  :  4;  Ps. 
1:3;  Is.  55:1;  Ezek.  47:9;  John  7  :  37 ;  Rev.  22:1; 
6 :  17. 


Appendix  of  Notes.  113 


God  AS  "Holy  Spirit."  Gen.  1:2;  (Ps.  104:30); 
Ex.  35:31;  Judg.  3:  10;  2  Sa.  23:  2;  (2Pe.  i  :  21);  Ps.  51  : 
2;  139  :  7  ;  Is.  61  :  I ;  Eze.  3  :  12;  Mark  I  :  10;  Lu.  4  :  14; 
John  3  :  34;  20  :  22 ;  Eph.  2  :  18. 

God  as  "  Son  of  Man."  Gen.  3:15;  32  :  24,  30 ;  9  :  27  ; 
12:  3;  49:  10;  Ps.  89:36;  Is.  ii:i;  7:14;  Dan.  7:13; 
Mat.  16  :  28;  Rom.  i  :  4. 

36.  Augustus  Blauvelt. —  37.  R.  Heber  Newton. — 38. 
Mat.  19:4;  23:35;  24:37;  Lu.  17  :  26-32;  Mar.  12:  26; 
John  6:3;  3:  14;  Mat.  12  :  3,4,  5,  42;  Lu.  4  :  25,  26,27; 
Matt.  12  :  40-42. —  39.  A  full  list  of  quotations  in  the  New 
Testament  from  the  Old  is  given  in  "New  Testament  Helps," 
by  the  author  of  this  volume.— 40.    Prof.  W.  G.  T.  Shedd. 

—  41.  Howard  Crosby,  D.  D. —  42.  In  1597  Galileo  made 
the  oft-quoted  remark  about  the  Bible  not  teaching  how  the 
heavens  go,  and  in  16S5  Clericus  took  the  next  step  of  skep- 
ticism, and  said  that  Jesus  did  not  come  to  teach  Criticism. 

—  43.  I  Kings  2:3:2  Kings  23  :  35;  2  Chron.  23  :  18;  Ezra 
3:2;  Dan.  9  :  II,  13;  Luke  24  :  44;  John  7  :  23;  i  Cor.  9  : 
9. —  44.  John  5  :  46,  47. —  45.  John  1  :  45;  Acts  3  :  22-24; 
7  :  37  ;  26  :  22  ;  Rom.  10:5,  19. —  46.  "  The  book  of  Moses  " 
is  a  common  expression  in  both  Testaments.  2  Chron.  25  : 
4 ;  35  :  12 ;  Ezra  6:18;  Neh.  13:1;  Mark  12  :  26.  Christ 
called  the  Pentateuch  simply  "  Moses,"  in  Luke  16  :  29,  31 ; 
24  :  27.  In  Heb.  4  :  7,  the  word  "  David  "  is  similarly  used 
of  the  Psalms,  some  of  which,  it  is  generally  conceded,  have 
been  added  since  David  edited  the  original  Psalter,  as  "  Wes- 
ley's Hymns,"  used  by  Wesleyans,  contain  hymns  other  and 
later  than  his,  so  that  the  argument  for  the  Mosaic  author- 
ship of  the  entire  Pentateuch  from  the  fact  that  it  was  called 
"  Moses,"  would  not  alone  be  conclusive.  So  with  the  name 
"Book  of  Moses."  "  Book  of  Judges  "  does  not  imply  that 
any  one  ever  believed  that  the  Judges  wrote  it.     It  will  be 


1 14  Appendix  of  Notes. 


noticed  also  that  we  do  not  use  in  our  argument  (because 
the  testimony  is  partial,  indirect,  and  unnecessary)  the  in- 
stances where  Christ  referred  to  separate  laws  or  chap- 
ters as  given  or  written  by  Moses,  such  as  the  decalogue 
(Mark  7  :  10),  the  law  of  the  leper  (Mark  i  :  44,  etc.),  the 
law  of  divorce  (Mat.  19  :  7),  although  it  is  very  significant 
that  in  one  case  at  least  he  quoted  as  written  by  Moses  apas- 
sage  "  concerning  the  bush"  which  is  not  specifically  declared  in 
the  Pentateuch  to  have  been  written  by  him. —  (Lu.  20  :  37  ;  cf. 
Exod.  3.)  Against  the  use  of  these  references  to  single 
Mosaic  laws  or  codes  as  proving  Mosaic  authorship  of  the 
Pentateuch,  it  is  urged  with  some  force  that  it  does  not  prove 
that  Christ  wrote  the  four  gospels,  that  Paul  quotes  single 
passages  from  them  as  being  the  laws  of  Christ,  (i  Cor.  9  : 
14;  II  :  23,  24.)  There  is  no  parallel  in  Paul,  however,  for 
John  5  :  46,  or  John  7  :  19.  He  never  said,  "Did  not  Jesus 
give  you  the  four  gospels } "  nor  called  them  "  His  writings." 

The  indirect  evidence  of  the  quotations  which  Christ 
makes  from  chapters  here  and  there  in  the  Pentateuch,  is 
thus  given  by  Rev.  Howard  Crosby,  D.  D. :  — 

"  I.     Our  Lord  quoted  the  Pentateuch  as  of  Moses. 

"  2.  The  Pentateuch,  in  our  Lord's  day,  was  one  book, 
and  universally  regarded  as  of  one  author,  i.  e.  Moses. 

"The  latter  proposition  clinches  the  former.  It  prevents 
our  saying  that  only  those  words  actually  quoted  by  our 
Lord  are  of  Moses ;  or  at  most  only  the  immediate  context. 

"If.I  quoted  a  page  of  Bancroft's  History,  and,  in  quoting 
it,  said:  'Bancroft  says  thus  and  thus,'  I  should  be  under- 
stood as  believing  that  Bancroft's  whole  work  was  Ban- 
croft's. No  righteous  critic  could  say  that  I  meant  to  affirm 
Bancroft's  authorship  only  of  that  page  or  chapter  quoted, 
unless  Bancroft's  work  ivas  already  split  tip  into  sections,  and 
attributed  to  various  authors.     It  is  so  with  the  Pentateuch. 


Afpcndix  of  Notes.  i  r  5 


The  Pentateuch,  in  our  Lord's  day,  was  not  split  up  into 
sections  and  attributed  to  various  authors.  All  scholars 
agree  that  it  was  considered  as  one  work  by  one  author, 
Moses.  .  .  .  Now,  we  are  to  keep  in  mind  that  the 
Jews  in  our  Lord's  time  had  none  of  the  divisions  of  the 
Pentateuch  which  scientific  study  has  produced  in  our  time. 
They  had  no  Deuteronomist  and  priest-code,  no  Elohist  and 
Jehovist,  and  second  Elohist  and  Redactor,  no  five  Narra- 
tors. All  this  is  new.  To  the  Jews  of  our  Lord's  day  '  the 
law'  was  a  book,  one  book,  and  that  the  Pentateuch,  just  as 
we  have  it.  In  this  light  it  is  surely  impossible  to  deny  that 
Jesus  understood  the  Pentateuch  to  be  the  work  of  Moses." 
47.  Prof.  C.  A.  Briggs  and  Hermann  Strack.  —  48.  New 
York  Observer. —  49.  See  report  in  The  Christian  World, 
London. —  50.  Colenso  and  others  say  that  even  if  Christ 
knew  that  the  Pentateuch  was  not  the  work  of  Moses,  lie 
might  innocently  have  "  spoken  of  it  as  such  in  accordance 
with  the  prevalent  ideas  of  his  time,"  which  is  only  a  sugar- 
coating  of  the  blasphemy,  that  the  divine  Christ  might,  in- 
stead of  correcting  an  error,  distinctly  and  repeatedly  con- 
firm it. —  51.  We  are  reminded  that  Christ,  when  Llis  deity 
was  veiled  in  flesh,  declared  there  was  one  subject  on  which 
He  could  not  speak,  because  he  did  not  know  about  it. 
(Mat.  24  :  36.)  From  that  it  is  argued  that  He  might  not 
have  known  some  things  which  He  a'/d?  say  —  an  inference 
much  too  strong  for  the  text.  To  say  that  Christ,  when  in- 
carnate, did  not  know  some  of  the  things  of  which  lie  did 
not  speak,  is  vastly  less  than  the  claim  of  the  new  criticism 
that  He  did  not  know  some  of  the  things  which  He  pro- 
fessed to  know,  and  of  which  He  often  spoke.  We  are  told 
by  Robertson  Smith,  that  He  no  more  anticipated  the  dis- 
coveries of  Colenso  than  .those  of  Galileo.  It  seems  to  be 
forgotten  that  He  did  not  talk  about  astronomy,  did  not 


1 1 6  Appendix  of  Notes. 


endorse  Ptolemy's  mistakes,  but  He  did  often  talk  of  "the 
law,"  for  it  was  a  part  of  the  text-book  which  he  came  from 
Heaven  to  expound  and  "fulfill."  That  would  be  the  last 
place  for  Him  to  be  mistaken.  He  certainly  claimed  to  be 
accurate  in  all  that  He  did  say  in  many  passages, —  among 
others  John  12  :  48-50:  "He  that  rejecteth  me,  and  receiv- 
eth  not  my  sayings,  hath  one  that  judgeth  him ;  the  word 
that  I  spake,  the  same  shall  judge  him  in  the  last  day.  For 
I  spake  not  from  myself ;  but  the  Father  which  sent  me,  He 
hath  given  me  a  commandment,  what  I  should  say,  and  what 
I  should  speak.  And  I  know  that  his  commandment  is 
life  eternal ;  the  things  therefore  which  I  speak,  even  as  the 
Father  hath  said  unto  me,  so  I  speak." — 52.  See  Ezra  3  : 
2;  6  :  iS;  7:6;  Neh.  i  :  7,  8;  8  :  i,  14;  g  :  14;  10:  29;  13  : 
I.  See  Concordance  for  540  references  to  Moses  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch, and  yet  others  in  all  parts  of  both  Old  and  New 
Testament. —  53.  Howard  Crosby,  D.  D. —  54.  Prof.  W.  G. 
T,  Shedd. —  55.  The  Observer. —  56.  H.  Sinclair  Patterson, 
M.  D. —  57.  The  Christiait  World,  of  London. —  58.  Gen.  3; 
7:16;  24  :  3 ;  28  :  21 ;  2  Chron.  18:31;  Psa.  56  :  10. 

59.  Prof.  Francis  L.  Patton  says,  "  If  it  were  held  that 
the  words  of  Christ  and  the  New  Testament  writers  are  suf- 
ficiently accounted  for,  by  supposing  that  a  fourfold  docu- 
ment was  composed  under  the  direction  of  Moses,  parts  of 
it  being  written  by  Moses  himself,  or  that  Mosaic  writings 
were  the  basis  of  our  present  Pentateuch,  we  should  be 
obliged  to  admit  that  though  this  view  may  fall  very  far 
short  of  the  truth,  it  nevertheless  Cinnot  be  held  to  be  in- 
consistent with  the  Confession  of  faith."  This  is  doubtless 
the  meaning  of  Luther's  words,  which  the  critics  misquote 
as  an  endorsement  of  their  efforts  to  prove  that  the  Penta- 
teuch was  not  even  edited  by  Moses.  "  What  matters  it," 
he  said,  "if  Moses  should  not  himself  have  written  the  Pen- 


Appendix  of  Notes.  1 1 7 


tateuch  ? " —  60.  Law  of  Circumcision  long  neglected,  Josh. 
5:5;  Passover,  2  Kings  23  :  21,  etc.;  Feast  of  Tabernacles. 
Neh.  8  :  17;  Sabbaths,  2  Chron.  36  :  21;  whole  "Book  of 
the  Law  "  restored  to  notice  after  long  neglect,  2  Kings  22*3, 
etc.  No  record  in  all  Old  Testament  of  the  Day  of  Atone- 
ment being  observed. —  61.  Deu.  17  :  17. —  62.  Of  these 
540  references  to  Moses  in  the  Pentateuch,  60  are  found 
in  Deuteronomy,  180  in  Numbers,  60  in  Leviticus,  and 
240  in  E.\odus. —  63.  Mat.  15:4;  19  :  iS,  19;  22  :  yj,  38, 
39;  Mark  12  :  29,  30;  Luke  10  :  25-28. —  64.  Luke  4:4,  12; 
(Deu.  8:3;  6  :  16.)  — 65.  Mat.  5  :  17,  19.— 66.  Mat.  5  : 
.43;  Mark  7  :  7,  8;  Mat.  15  :  4-9. —  67.  Mat.  21  :  16;  12  :  i- 
8.— 68.  Mat.  9:13.-69.  Mat.  5:31,38.-70.  Chris'ian 
Union.— 11.  Deu.  6  :  5.— 72.  Professor  Swing.— 73.  Lev. 
19:  18. —  74.  Lev.  19:34,  etc.;  i  Kings  8  :  10-12;  2  Chron. 
7  : 1-3,  37-40 ;  Mai.  i  :  1 1.  "In  the  Book  of  Proverbs,".s.dys 
Delitzsch,  "the  name  of  Israel  nowhere  occurs,  but  that  of 
ma7i  is  found  all  the  more  frequently."  So  Job  is  not  Jew- 
ish, nor  Genesis,  nor  Jonah,  nor  Daniel.  These  are  interna- 
tional, uninational,  world-reaching. —  75.  R.  Heber  Newton. 
—  76.  Mai.  3:1;  Mat.  11  :  10,  13,  14. —  77.  Lu.  4:21;  Isa. 
61  :  I.— 78.  Mat.  11:5;  Isa.  35  :  5;  29  :  18.— 79.  Mat. 
13  :  14;  21  :  42;  John  15  :  25. —  80.  John  13  :  18;  17  :  12. — 
81.  John  19  :  29.-82.  Luke  24  :  27.-83.  Gen.  i  :  i  ;  Psa. 
104  :  30. —  84.  Judg.  3  :  10. —  85.  E.xod.  35  :  31. —  36.  2  Pet. 
I  :  21 ;  2  Sam.  23  :  2. —  87.  Psa.  51  :  11. —  83.  Professor 
Swing. —  89.  Mat.  25  :  15-31. —  20.  John  13  :  i3;  17  :  1  ?  ; 
(Psa.  109  :  8,  17). —  91.  2  Sam.  i  :  19-27;  3  :  2i2>- — 92.  See 
Mark  9  :  44,  (Isa.  66  :  24) ;  Mat.  7  :  23,  (Psa.  6:8);  Mat.  1 5  : 
7-9. —  93.    The  Christian  Union. —  94.  Augustus  Elauvelt. 

95.  God's  Final  Reckoning  with  LIis  Servants,  as 
described  by  Christ  and  recorded  by  Matthew,  the  converted 
collector.  Mat.  9  :  9. 


1 1 8  Appendix  of  Notes. 


1.  Duties  are  given  by  God  to  all  "  according  to  tlieir  sev- 
eral ability."     25  :  14,  15  {"  talents  "). 

2.  These  duties  include  more  than  morality.  19  :  1S-21 
(young  ruler's  "lack") ;  7  :  12  (Golden  Rule). 

3.  Every  one  will  be  called  to  give  account  of  his  stew- 
ardship, and  to  receive  reward  or  punishment.  25  :  19 
("talents");  20  :  8  (vineyard  "penny");  12  :  36  ("every  idle 
word") ;  16  :  27  ("  Son  of  man  "). 

4.  This  account  may  be  called  for  at  any  moment.  24  :  36- 
39  ("As  days  of  Noah") ;  24  :  42,  44,  46  ("watch") ;  24  :  48- 
51  ("  delayeth  ") ;  25  :  10-13  ("virgins"). 

5.  The  faithful  will  be  commended  and  rewarded.  7  :  11 
("Lord"  —  "but  doeth");  10:32  ("confess");  25:20,  21 
("  5  talents  ") ;  20  :  9,  10  ("  every  man  a  penny  ") ;  25  :  34,  35 
("  Come,  ye  blessed  "). 

6.  The  unfaithful  will  be  condemned  and  punished.  10  : 
33  ("deny");  15  :  13  ("  plant  ").  \a'\  In  spite  of  foolish  ex- 
cuses. 25  :  25  (i  talent  buried).  \b\  No  reasonable  excuse 
to  offer.  22  :  1 1-13  ("speechless  ").  [r]  Separated  from  the 
good.  13  :  30  (tares  and  wheat) ;  13  :  47-50  (bad  fish) ;  25  : 
31-33  (sheep  and  goats).  \d\  Punished  terribly  after  death. 
25  :  24-30  ("one  talent") ;  25  :  41-46  ("  Depart  "). 

7.  Not  only  the  vicious  classes,  but  also  those  guilty  of 
heart-sins  will  be  punished.  18  :  23-35  [forgiven  "  10,000  " 
("100")]. 

8.  The  punishment  of  sin  not  personal,  but  natural.  7  : 
27  (house  flooded);  7  :  17  (tree  and  fruit). 

9.  Christ,  like  Jonathan,  shoots  arrows  of  loving  warn- 
ing by  his  words  about  our  peril.  3  :  10,  8  ("axe" — "tree") 
4  :  17  ("repent");  5  :  20  ("exceed  scribes  ") ;  7  :  13  ("strait 
gate");  10:28  ("kill  body ") ;  12:41  ("Nineveh");  18: 
8  ("hand  offend");  26  :  24  ("betrayed");  23  :  37-39  ("Je- 
rusalem "). 


Appendix  of  Notes.  119 


96.  John  8  :  45 ;  Mark  9  :  42-4S ;  Mat.  23  :  13,  etc. —  97, 
Deu.  I  :  31 ;  Psa.  103  :  13;  84  :  26;  Isa.  66  :  13;  49  =  IS; 
27  :  10  ;  Hos.  14  :  3  ;  Deu.  23  :  5  ;  2  Sam.  7  :  14. —  93.  Deu. 
7  :  7,  8  ;  10  :  14,  15  ;  Isa.  43  :  4 ;  Jcr.  33  :  i. —  99.  Psa.  89  : 
14;  John  3:16,36;  Rev.  7:14;  6:16;  Rom.  15:30; 
rieb.  3  :  7,  II.— 100.  Mat.  11.— 101.  Mat.  12.— 102.  Deu. 
I.— 103.  Deu.  4.— 104.  Exod.  34  :  6,  7.— 105.  Mat.  22  : 
31,  32 ;  Exod.  3  :  6.— lOS.  John  5  :  39.— 107.  77/,?  Congre- 
gationalist.—  IOQ.  Psa.  17:5;  Prov.  14  :  32.— 109.  W.  C. 
Gray,  D.  D. — 110.  "  Doctrines  of  Faith  and  Morals  for  Jew- 
ish Schools  and  Families,  by  Dr.  S.  Ilerxheimer,  translated 
from  the  German  by  Dr.  C.  Kleeberg." 

111.  Psa.  136:  I.— 112.  Prov.  23  :  iS.— 113.  Psa.  16  : 
II  ;  31  :  19;  Eccl.  7  :  15  ;  3  :  17  ;  12:7;  Prov.  14  :  22  ;  Gen. 
15:1512  Sam.  12  :  23 ;  Isa.  26  :  19. — 114.  See  Note  35.— 
115.  John  3  :  10.— 116.  Psa.  6 ;  32;  51  ;  103;  130;  143-^ 
117.—  Whittier. 


DEVOTIONAL    BOOKS. 


Mother   Munroe  ;   or,  The  Shining  Path.     By  Mrs.  Mary  D. 

James.    Handsome  16mo.     Witli  Portrait.    75  ctg. 

The  record  of  tlic  life  of  one  of  the  most  saintly  women  of  the  age. 

"  Perfect  trust  and  perfect  rest  seemed  the  sole  tenants  of  her  heart." 
—  President  Wm.  F.  Warren,  D.D. 

Lessons    of   Trust.      By   L.   B.   E.,  author  of  "  How   I    Found 

Jesus."    Elegant  16mo.    Cloth,  75  cts. ;  paper,  40  cts. 

For  all  who  would  serve  the  Lord  with  gladness.  Abounds  in  com- 
fort and  helpfulness  for  hours  of  trouble  and  temptation. 

"  From  significant  initial  letters,  wc  suppose  the  volume  is  from  the 
pen  of  the  accomplished  and  devout  wife  of  the  publisher.  It  is  a  de- 
lightful and  profitable  manual  for  hours  of  meditation." — Zion's  Herald, 
{Boston.) 

The  Blood   of  Jesus.      By  Rev.  William  Reid,   D.  D.     18mo. 

Cloth,  35  cts. 

Very  clearly  and  helpfully  sets  forth.  In  language  Wiat  all  can  under- 
stand, the  ground  of  peace  with  God. 

The  Gift  of  God.     By  Theodore  Monod.     16rao.    Cloth.    50  cts. 

"  Simple,  clear,  and  very  sweet  presentations  of  Christ,  God's  un- 
speakable Gift."  —  ^fe^c  Vork  Christia7i  Advocate. 

Calls  to  Christ.     By  Rev.  W.  R.  Nicoll,  M.A.    16mo.    Cloth. 
50  cts. 
Designed  for  Christian  workers  In  the  awakening  of  the  unconverted. 

Xjittle  Ones  in  the  Fold.     By  Rev.  E.  P.  Hammond.    16mo. 

Cloth.   60  cts. 

Contains  many  instances  of  conversion  of  children,  and  enforces  the 
duty  and  hopefulness  of  work  to  bring  them  to  Jesus  early  in  life. 

The  Best  of  Faith.     By  Rev.  A.  B.  Earle,  D.D.    Cloth.  40  cts. 

Unfolds  the  believer's  privilege,  and  shows  how  the  soul  may  abide  lu 
sweet  rest,  amid  all  the  cares  and  temptations  of  life. 


•«•  Any  of  the  above  books  mailed,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  prico. 
Descriptive  Catalogue  of  our  Publications  free. 

JAMES    H.  KARIiE,   Publisher, 

178  lYashiiigton  Street;,  Boston,  Illaas. 


BOOKS  FOR  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS 


Hand-Book  of  Revivals.    By  Rev.  H.  C.  Fish,  D.D.    12mo. 

Cloth.    S1.50. 

Treats  every  element  of  revival  work,  —  indications,  hindrances, 
objections,  means,  and  methods;  preaching,  prayer,  and  singing;  evan- 
gelists, inquirers,  converts,  Sunday  schools,  Ac. 

"  There  is  not  in  this  work,  so  tar  as  we  have  been  able  to  discover, 
any  single  phase  belonging  to  a  genuine  revival  lel^.  unnoticed."  — 
Christian  at  Work,  {New  York.) 

iirlnging  in  Sheaves.    Bv  Rev.  A.  B.  Earle,   D.  D.     With 

PortriiH.    \lmo.    Cloth.    $1.00. 

This  work,  drawn  from  the  autlior's  experience,  is  invaluable  to  all 
who  would  he  successful  workers  for  Christ. 

"  Nothing  has  for  a  long  time  been  published,  better  adapted  to 
arouse  holy  zeal  in  the  cause  of  Christ."  — Methodist,  {New  York.) 

Revivals,  and  How  to  Promote  Them.  By  Rev.  Orson 
Parker.    12mo.    With  Portrait.    Cloth.    $1.75. 

This  work  is  the  fruit  of  the  authors  experience  in  revivals  for  forty 
years,  and  is  intended  to  be  a  practical  guide  in  revival  work. 
'  It  is  a  volume  for  the  hour."  —  Zion's  Herald. 

Harvest  Work  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  as  illustrated  in  Rev. 
E.  P.  Hammond's  labors  in  England,  Scotland,  and  America.  12mo. 
Cloth.    $1.00. 

Revival  Sermons.  By  Rev.  Emerson  Andrews.  12mo.  Cloth. 
With  Portrait.    $1.25. 

This  volume  contains  fifty-four  condensed  sermons  by  this  revival 
preacher. 

Life,  Labors,  and  Bible  Studies  of  Rev.  George  F. 

Pentecost.     Edited  by  P.  C.   Headley,   under  Mr.   Pentecost's 
supervision.    12mo.    With  Portrait.    $1.50. 

Mr.  Pentecost's  life  has  been  one  of  remarkable  Interest.  His  B'.V'te 
readmgs,  for  richness  and  suggestiveness,  are,  as  Joseph  Cook  says  ot 
them,  "  mountain  summits  laden  with  the  dew  of  Hermon." 


•«*  Any  of  the  above  books  mailed,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  prive. 
Oascriptive  Catalogue  of  our  Publiealions  free. 

SATHLEH    H.  EAKX-E,  Publleh«r, 

178  TVn>i^.•^».;*tn■!J  Strcft     t-Snsion,  :niag«. 


BOOKS  OP  TRAVEL,  HEALTH,  «&c. 


The  Picfcorial    Cabinet   of  Marvels.    Comprising  History, 

Science,  l>iscovery,  Jiivention,  Kutiiral  History,  Travel,  Art,  and 
Adventure.  Illustrated  with  tuU-pase  engravings  and  plates  in  colors. 
Large  royal  octavo.  Elegantly  txjnnd  in  magnificent  gilt  and  black 
sides.    Gilt  edges.    A  super!)  illustrated  Gitt  Book.     $'J.50. 

Grandmamma's  Letters  from.  Japan.    By  Mrs.  Maiy  Pruyn. 

Illustrated.    ICmo.     Cloth,  $1.00. 

Jlrs.  Pruyn,  one  of  the  leading  ladies  of  Albany  in  social  position  and 
benevolent  enterpri.<;e,  is  widely  known  for  her  work  in  Japan.  These 
letters  should  be  in  every  home  and  Sunday-school  library. 

"  Jlrs.  Pruyn  is  a  close  and  intelligent  observer." —  Evening  Journal, 
Albatiy. 

Sketches  of  Palestine.     A  Description  of  Scenes  in  the  Holy 
Land  and  the  East,  all  in  verse.     By  Rev.  E.  P.  Hammond.    "With 
steel  Portraits  of  Mr.  and  Mrs.  Hammond,  the  tour  having  been  their 
wedding  trip.    16mo.    Cloth,  7.5c. 
"The  main  features  of  the  long  journey  are  seen  as  in  panoramic 

views.    The  hook  is  full  of  Jesns  and  the  Gospel.    Hundreds  who  would 

nfit  read  a  sermon  will  gladly  read  this,  though  it  is  full  of  sermons." — 

Christian  Nfiws. 

Travels  in  Bible  Lands.     By  Rev.  Emerson  Andrews.       6mo. 

17  illustrations.    Cloth,  SOc. 

Coiitains  letters  written  by  M^.  Andrews  during  one  of  his  visits  to  the 
Lauds  of  the  Mible.  Talks  on  religious  subjects  are  interspersed.  The 
work  is  suited  specially  to  \outhful  readers. 

Tact,  Push  and  Principle.     By  William  M.  Thayer.    12mo. 

37U  pages.     Cloth,  $1  60. 

A  book  for  every  young  man.  Gives  the  elements,  principles,  and 
methods  of  success.  Shows  that  character  and  .success  are  not  ni  oppo- 
sition, and  illustrates  its  points  and  suggestiwns  from  the  li\es  of  suc- 
cessful men,  showing  how  they  succeeded,  and  inspiring  every  young 
man  to  make  the  very  most  of  iiimself 

The  Human  Body  and  Health.    By  E.  Small,  M.D.    12mo. 

432  pages.    Illustrated.    $1..5(). 

A  book  that  should  be  in  every  household,  and  with  which  old  and 
young  should  become  familiar.  It  treats  of  the  body  and  the  functions 
and  use  of  its  many  parts,  the  laws  of  health,  &c.,  and  all  from  the 
standpoint  of  a  Christian  physician. 


***  Jny  booJ:  mailed,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  price.     Ca'alogue 
of  our  piiMicatiovs  free. 

JAMES   H.  EARSL.E,  PuUVher, 


GOSPEL    TRACTS, 

For  Christians   and   the  Unconvertea. 


All  for  Jesus.  By  J.  T.  W.  25  cents  per  dozen  ;  $1.50  per 
hundred. 

Growing,  because  Abiding.  By  Rev.  A.  B.  Earle,  D.  D.  lr» 
cents  per  dozen;  $1.50  per  hundred. 

Frances  Ridley  Havergal's  Second  Experience.  By  her 

Sister.    25  cents  per  dozen;  $1.50  per  liinidred. 

How  I  Found  Jesus.  By  Mrs.  J.  H.  E.  20  cents  per  dozen; 
$1.50  per  hundred. 

I  Love  to  Trust  in  Jesus.  By  Mrs.  Mary  D.  James.  10 
cents  per  dozen  ;  75  cents  per  hundred. 

No  Salvation  beyond  ttie  Grave.  By  a  layman.  20  cents 
per  dozen;  $1.50  per  hundred. 

Talk,  (A)  WITH  AX  Inquirer  about  God's  Idea  of  Six  and 
Way  of  Pakdon.  By  Jliss  Frances  E.  Willard.  25  cents  per  dozen ; 
$1.60  per  hundred. 

The  Higher  Christian  Life.  By  Rev.  J.  J.  Miller.  20  cents 
per  dozen ;  $1.50  per  hundred. 

The  Jewel  Found.  By  Mrs.  J.  H.  E.,  author  of  "How  I 
Found  Jesus."     20  cents  por  dozen  ;  $1.50  per  hundred. 

Ten  Evidences  of  Conversion.  Ry  Rev.  A.  B.  Earle,  D.D. 
10  cents  per  dozen;  75  cent.s  per  hundred. 

The  Anxious  Inquirer  Answered.    By  A.  D.  E.  Hodges. 

16  cents  per  dozen;  75  cents  per  hundred. 

Triumphal  Song.  By  Mrs.  Mary  D.  James.  10  cents  per 
dozen ;  76  cents  per  hundred. 

■Why  ISTot  Now.    By  Rev.  A.  B.  Earle,  D.  D.   32mo.  20  ^ents 

per  dozen;  75  cents  per  hundred. 

"Within  the  Gates  ;  or  Comfort  for  the  Bereaved.  33 
cents  per  dozen  ;  $2.00  per  hundred. 


stmit 

cen 

receipt  of  price 


JAM^ES    n.  EARLE,   Pmblislaer, 

178  Wasliiujjtoii  Street,  Boston,  Mass. 


By  Rev.  A.  B.  EARLE,  D.  D. 


The  Morning  Hour.     For  Family  Devotions  and  Private  Medj 
ti.tion.     (.loiitaiiis  a  portion  of  Scripture,  witli  suggestive  spiritual  Ex 
p.isition,  and  a  brief  llvran  for  every  Day  of  tlie  Year.   Elegant  octavo 
Cloth,  $2.00;  halt  leatlier,  $2.50;  full  Turkey.  84.00. 
"  Us  comments  are  everywhere  full  of  the  marrow  of  the  gospel."  — 

Congregationalist,  {Boston.) 

Sringing  in  Sheaves.    The  outgrowth  of  the  author's  long  pxpe- 
rience  in  gospel  work.     12mo.     Cloth.     With  steel  ii'irtrait.    $1.20. 
"  One  of  the  most  remarkable  books  ever  given  to  the  public."  —  West- 
ern Recorder,  {Louisville.) 

The  Rest  of  Faith.     Shows  how  the   soul  may  abide  in  sweet  and 
constant  re^t  in  all  the  care  of  the  daily  life.    Cloth,  40  cts. ;  gilt  edges, 
60  cts. ;  full  Russia,  90  cts. 
"  Meets  the  deep  longings  of  the  hungry  soul."  —  Watchman  and  Re- 

fieclor,  {boston.) 

Abiding  Peace.  Has  been  written  to  meet  the  latest  diffici  Ities 
and  objections  in  respect  to  the  doctrine  of  perfect  deliverance  irom 
unrest  and  condemnation,  and  to  enable  the  Christian  to  enjoy  abiding 
peace  in  the  daily  life.    ISmo.    Cloth,  oO  cts. 

Work  of  an  Evangelist.  A  Review  of  Fiftv  Ye.irs  in  the  Min- 
istry. Together  witli  The  Fiftieth  Anniversarv  Sermon,  delivered  in 
Tremont  Temple,  Boston.    Cloth,  25  cts. ;  paper,  10  cts. 

The  Title  Examined  ;  or,  How  mav  I  Know  I  am  a  Christian? 
A  book  for  inquirers,  and  for  every  Christian  who  would  be  sure  of  his 
title  to  heaven.    18mo.    Cloth,  25  cts. ;  paper,  10  cts. 

Revival  Hymns.  Contains  those  Hymns,  with  the  addition  of  a 
few  tunes,  suited  to  seasons  of  special  religious  effort.  Large  tvpo 
and  convenient  size.    Cloth,  25  cts. ;  paper,  10  cts. ;  8vo,  leather,  90 eta. 

"Why  Not  Now  ?  A  searching  Tract  for  the  Carelesss  and  the 
Anxious.    25  cents  per  dozen. 

Growing,  because  Abiding.  Answers  important  Questions  in 
regard  to  the  rest  of  faith.    25  cents  per  dozen. 

Ten  Evidences  of  Conversion;  with  Ten  Questions  for  Self- 
Examination.     10  cents  per  dozen. 

*»*  ■Any  of  the  above  works  mailed,  postpaid,  on  receipt  <y  prie' 
Descriptive  Catalogue  of  our  Publications  free. 

JAMES  H.  £ARr,£,  Publisher, 

te'8  Washington  Street.  Doston,  Afas^. 


BOOKS    OP   BIOGRAPHY. 


James  A     Garfleld.      By    C.   C.   Coffin,    (War   Correspondent 

'■  CarU'toii.")    With  I'.jrtrait.    Illustrated.    r2mu.    Si-jo 
The  Life  oCCiPiieral  (iartield, -vvritteu  by  an  author  ut  such  brilliant 
reputation,  should  be  in  every  library. 
"  Admirably  told."  —  Senator  Geo.  F-  Hoar. 
"  Exceedingly  satisfactory."  —  Mrs.  General  Garfield. 

Charles  JewettjM.  D.     ByWiliiam  M.  Thayer,  autlior  of  Lives 
of  Lincoln,  Washington,  Garfield,  Ac.    Witli  Portrait,    liino.    $1.50. 
Dr.  Jewetfs  brilliant  talents,  his  wit  and  humor,  and  his  consecration 

to  the  work,  have  Riven  him  the  foremost  place  animiK  Temperance 

workers  at  home  and  abroad. 
"  Immensely  entertaining."  —  Rev.  T-  L.  Cuyler,  D.D.,  in  New  York 

Evangelist. 

Charles  Sumner.  By  William  L.  Cornell,  LL.  D.,  and  Bishop 
Gilbert  Haven,  D.O.  With  the  leading  Eulogies.  With  I'ortrait. 
Illustrated.    12mo.    Cloth.    $1.50. 

These  Eulogies,  by  the  lendina;  men  of  the  nation,  are  masterpieces 
of  thought  and  expression,  invaluable  to  every  professional  man,  stu- 
dent, and  public  speaker. 

Phlneas  Stowe  and  Bethel  Work.    Compiled  by  Rev.  H.  A. 

Cooke.    I'.'mo.    Cloth,  gilt  and  black.    $1.60. 

The  story  of  Mr.  Stowe's  work  among  the  sailors,  the  intemperate, 
and  the  fallen,  is  full  of  inspiration,  and  is  as  thrdling  as  a  novel. 

"  Happily  adapted  to  preserve  the  memory  of  a  singularly  useful  and 
noble  lite,  and  to  stimulate  emulalion  of  the  rare  virtues  that  shone  in 
the  character  of  Phineas  Stowe."  —  Daily  Adverlixer,  {Boston.) 

Life,  Letters,  and  Wayside  Gleanings.    By  Mrs.  B.  H. 

Crane.    Octavo.    $2.00. 

Mrs.  Crane  gives  not  only  the  history  of  a  family  and  a  life,  bat  she 
has  interwoven  recollections  of  the  olden  time,  incidents  and  lessons  of 
great  interest  and  value. 

"A  charming  book  for  the  home  and  firesiAe."— Watchman,  (Boston.) 

Log-Cabin  to  White  House.     By  W.  M.  Thayer,   author  of 
'•  Tlie  Bobbin  Boy,"  "  Pioneer  Boy,"  &c.    12mo.    $1.50. 
A  Boys'  Life  of  President  Garfield.    Fascinating  and  invaluable  to 

boys  and  young  men. 

*,*  Any  of  these  books  ntaili'd,  postpaid,  on  receipt  of  pricr 
Descriptive  Catalogue  of  our  Publications  f-ee. 

JAMES    TI.   EARLE,   Publislier, 

178  "Wasliington  Street,  Boston,  Maa*^ 


MISCELLANEOUS. 


Memorial   of  Prof.   Elihu  Koot.     By  Prof.  H.  H.  NeiL 

Octavo.    Paper,  '25c. 

Prof.  Koot  was  one  of  the  purest  characters  and  most  promising  teach- 
ers In  science.  His  hfe,  full  of  lessons,  Las  been  admirably  sketched  by 
his  friend,  l*rof.  Hed. 

Xjondon  Bridge.  A  Poem  for  the  Times.  By  Prof.  James  A. 
■  Martling.    18mo.    Illustrated.    40c. 

This  charming  story,  in  verse,  touches  upon  the  relations  of  labor  and 
capital,  as  it  sketches  the  lives  of  its  actors. 

The  Human  WUl.     By  Rev.  A.  B.  Eaxle,  D.  D.     18mOb 

Cloth.    '250. 

This  little  work  has  already  been  received  with  most  remarkable  in- 
terest, alike  by  clergy  and  laity,  and  should  be  everywhere  read. 

The  Old  and  New  Version.  By  Rev.  Philip  Schatf,  D.  D., 
Chairman  of  the  American  Revision  Comittee.  12mo.  Pa- 
per, 10c. 

Indian  "Wars  of  New  England.     Including  the  Life  of 

Eliot,  the  Indian  Apostle.    By  Colonel  R.  B.  Caverly.    12mo. 

476  pages.    Id  Illustrations.    $2.00. 

The  heroism  and  self-denial  of  the  early  Pilgrim  settlers  of  New 
England,  in  their  conflicts  with  the  Indians,  furnish  lessons  that  cannot 
be  too  often  or  too  strongly  enforced.  The  book  is  one  for  the  home  and 
the  public  library. 

Pearls  of  Worlds.  By  Rev.  Emerson  Andrews.  With  Por- 
trait.   12mo.    384  pages.    $1.50. 

Mr.  Andrews  adds  to  his  list  of  works  this  new  volume.  It  maybe 
styled  an  Encvclop/edia  nf  helps,  suggestions,  illustrations  for  preach- 
ers, teachers,  students,  and  people  generally  who  wish  to  get  wit  and 
wisdom,  personal  experience,  religious  truth,  and  the  like,  in  compact 
and  ready  shape. 

"  A  book  of  inestimable  value."  — Rev.  S.  B.  Wolis. 

All  Things.    By  Frances  Ridley  Havergal.    Cloth,  25c.;  Pa- 
per, 10c. 
This  we  regard  as  one  of  the  most  suggestive  and  helpfol  of  the 

many  works  of  this  very  popular  author. 


*#*  Anj/  of  the  above  works  mailed  postpaid  on  receipt  O/pticA 
Descriptive  Catalogue  of  our  publications  mailed  free. 

TAMES  H.  EARLE,  Publisher, 

tlB  TVaahington  St.,  Boston,  Mass. 


DATE  DUE 


WAY  ^ 

a  ZUUU 

■ 

Demco,  Inc.  38-2S 

3 

GAYLORO    BROS. 

MAKERS 

SYRACUSf,-  N-T. 


BS480  .C88 

Must  the  Old  Testament  go?  ;  or,  The 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  00050  9366 


